of this grief because we saved the attacks. the last 100 attacks they said they stopped by the fbi, one of them was a real one. the 99 were ones that they the 99 were ones that they participated in and set up and enticed people, entrapped people into doing. and this is the lies that government tell. we need to have an honest government is what we need. [applause] one thing that's going on right now. very positive. you'll hear more about it. it is a procedure which is morally legitimate and constitutional because it's not been used very much.

it's the issue of the right of the states and the right of the individual when possible through jury nullification to nullify the unconstitutional laws coming out of washington, d.c. it's a neat issue to bring liberals and conservatives together. because conservatives get a bad wrap because i believe in state's rights, yeah, that means you're a racist. that's the way -- that's their mentality. but i like the last paragraph of the declaration of independence because they talk about free and independent states as if they were countries -- they emphasize that in the declaration. so so this is what will have to happen is it might really happen when there's chaos. in detroit and things like that. is there a government in detroit right now? i mean, is there a police force?

oh, yeah, there's a burglar outside of my house. i think i'll call the police. it's over with. so when the federal government can't respond because the money doesn't work and they can't pay the military and the troops come home, that's the way the soviet system collapsed. if that's the case, there's going be -- there's hundreds of times right now that our local governments, cities, townships, and states are writing actual laws to nullify, you know, when it comes to obamacare and these other things, they're not going to follow through on them. but in the midst of chaos, it would be de facto nullification. that's what's happening in detroit. there's no government. and the biggest risk is how thuggish will they get? because speaking out can become very dangerous. you know, we write laws on purpose and there's a lot of demagoguing going on to protect those individuals because all of the politicians want truth.

they want us to know everything about government so they write these strict laws that say, oh, if you're a whistleblower and telling the people the truth, then, you know, we'll protect you. yeah, sure. you do that and they charge you with treason. this reminds me that in a dictatorship truth is treason, with an empire of lies. the big empire, the government, is only held together by lies. these revolutions, whether it's bradley manning or snowden, they haven't hurt us. they haven't really hurt anyone. but they hurt the bureaucrat. they have hurt the politician. they embarrassed them. you mean to say we spy on every country in the world, all of our friends, all of our trading partners? we spy on them. they probably suspected it. it's out in the open right now. they're embarrassed by this stuff.

but that becomes treasonous to maintaining the facade that they are wonderful and good and humanitarian. but quite frankly, they get away with a lot by claiming they are the humanitarian. i tell you, if you have a sincere understanding and a desire for humanitarian treatment for the people and the best help for the poor and everybody else, you will believe in liberty and the free market. that's humanitarian with a result that has been proven throughout history to be the best way to feed the poor and make sure there's an equitable society. [applause] you know, samuel adams said it doesn't take a majority to win this. he said it takes a tireless irate minority to win it, who's willing to spread brush fires of liberty throughout the land. and that's what i see -- i see a nice brush fire right here.

so how many people do we have here? a couple hundred, 200, 300? if each one of you, if you're going to be leaving here, you're going to start another brush fire. and the purpose of the brush fire is to spread ideas. and everybody can have a brush fire. all you have to do is have a facebook, you know? and you've got to say the right things that don't get away from some of that silly stuff that goes on on facebook. give them this information. and because people -- if you have friends and neighbors and family and everybody else, i mean, that's where you start. but you're going to have other ideas about what to start, organizations to start, participating in this one and other ones. there are so many opportunities. i have no idea what would be best for the individual.

but everybody has a responsibility. i do believe that. and like i said, i think the responsibility is greater in the moral sense that if you know what is right and you really believe it, you believe it's best for you, you believe it's best for your family, you believe it's best for the world and best for all of history to move us in a certain direction, i would think that you have an obligation. and, you know, the other thing is you can have a lot of fun. i mean, just associating with like-minded people, i don't know, you've been here a couple of days. you'll be here tomorrow. if you stayed this long, if you stayed here to go through this little talk tonight, must mean you're having a little bit of fun at this little rally. now, the reason for this is we talk about very serious matters. you know, the bond market is going to burst and everything is going to come down on our heads.

but if you work with other people and you enjoy it and you know you feel good about what you are doing and if you can contribute to something. nobody knows exactly how things are going to work out. you know, tomorrow there could be an economic or a foreign policy disaster that changes the world overnight. and our personal lives are unpredictable, too. so i think what we should do is i have been involved because there's been other times -- other ways for me to spend extra time and energy. but i happen to enjoy visiting you. it's important. i'm delighted that you are interested. i'm delighted that you're at this function and part of yal. and i'm very encouraged that you've come out. i'm encouraged by your enthusiasm. thank you very much. keep going with our revolution. [applause]

thank you. thank you. >> ron paul! ron paul! ron paul! ron paul! ron paul! ron paul! ron paul! ron paul! ron paul! >> dr. paul said he would take a couple of questions. who's got the microphone over here? >> thank you for joining us, dr. paul. would you like to elaborate on the institute for prosperity and the television channel? >> a lot of people have been asking me lately, what's it like

to be retired? i haven't retired, i've retired from the congress and that's good. i don't miss getting on the airplane on a regular basis at the direction of john boehner. i get to make up my own schedule and i got to come here. so i have other -- several projects. one project will be on home-schooling emphasizing education. we're working on that. we should have a curriculum out in september. ronpaulcurriculum.com. you can find that. but also the ron paul institute for peace and prosperity is managed by daniel mcadams who did my foreign policy for many, many years. very, very well informed. and we have a website for that as well. but that's especially designed for foreign policy.

and, of course, the campaign for liberty is continuing. but soon we are going have a ron paul channel. and that will be an internet channel. and it will give me a chance to talk to more people. and i won't even have to get on an airplane. but i will try to go over news events and try to put the interpretation of a news event that i might have that might differ at times from the ordinary media. and, you know, the thing like with snowden and bradley manning, those are the kinds of things that i would be commenting on. there will be some guests, there will be interactive. there will be the opportunity to send in the questions from the viewers. and there will be interviews, special people. so i hope that -- i hope it will be very worthwhile.

i'm looking forward to it. it's another chance, once again, using technology to reach more and more people. thank you. >> thank you, dr. paul. on behalf of everyone here, i would like to say thank you so much for coming out and speaking to all of us. coming out of a retirement that's well deserved, sir. thank you very much. to many of us, you're our greatest inspiration and hero. on that note, i would like to ask you, sir, who's your greatest inspiration and hero? >> you know, i don't have one single person. you know? there's been a lot of influence in my life on different people from families to economists to very, very rarely politicians.

in my office, i had pictures of jefferson. i had a picture of a lot of economists in there. but i don't have one. i've gone into politics with an intense interest in trying to understand economics and that's why i frequently looked at "the economist." but so many people that i've read have had some influence. the one person i've already mentioned his name had a lot of influence because of what i call tone. he had to write tone on how to present news. that was leonard reed at the foundation for economic education. his advice was you can't convert people by grabbing them by the shirt collars and he also had another one he said become informed, the main responsibility is to learn, study, and be informed and people will seek you out and it will be worth something.

but to have one person -- no, there's been many. and the family, of course, has been very influential and most of it -- i like to -- everybody who i study and admire it and like to pick out elements of it and do my best to understand it. >> everyone here probably knows how you feel about the federal reserve. but i would like to know what your take on the bank of international settlements is? >> the bank of international settlements. >> she's asking about the bank of international settlement in switzerland. it's the central bank for the central bankers.[laughter] we probably don't need it. and it's the kind of thing where

they're very much involve in the bailouts. it's the kind of thing that our feds and our dollars worked with bis to pass out the money and the kind of thing they keep very, very secret. but it's a place where it is an exchange -- they do -- you know, all of the central banks of the world will have exchanges and they use that as a central location. but to know all of the details on how it worked, that's why we worked so hard to try to find out what they were doing on the bailouts. if you didn't have a federal reserve and you had openness in government, the bis wouldn't exist. >> i was wondering if you could

comment on the bubble in higher education and what your advice to students would be in the bubble? >> you're talking about the financial bubble? the debt bubble with the students. the students leaving college owe more than $1 trillion. it's more than all of the credit card debt. we could describe that as a bubble. most bubbles should be liquidated. but, you know, a lot of people, though, in the old days, at least, if you are owed an honest debt, you're supposed to work and pay it. but i don't think that money is going to be paid. i think it's a lot easier for me to describe what it should be like rather than exactly how that is going be handled. because right now, they just had these votes to make sure that the interest rates were way below the market rate to continue the bubble formation. once again, it was a humanitarian instinct to give everybody a college education and make it available. but instead of making -- improving education, education quality went down. more people went to college.

but did -- but because there were loans that were easy to get. it pushed up salaries of people and it pushed up the cost of education so there was an inflated price in colleges. i think some of that is going to burst when people realize that they can get -- there's a lot of talk now on people achieving without the official title of having a degree. at the same time, they can get degrees over the internet and become educated. the mess is there is a creature, you know, of wanting to give everybody an education. people said, well, you don't care about people. people don't have money. it's so expensive. you have to give them money and help them through. give them grants and low- interest loans. let's say this is a clean deal.

if he wants to go to college, you give him tax money. here, you can go to college. where does it come from? it comes from somebody else who didn't get to go to college. where's the morality of that? and the guy who gets to go to college, they take the tax money from the person who didn't go to college, give it to the guy to go to college and makes more money. why should anyone be required -- i'm sure there were taxpayers' money that helped me get my medical degree. why was that right to take money from somebody to get an m.d. degree and make a good living. it's just not the right thing to do. so the government has created this. before you had the government involved -- i remember the transition occurring in the late 1950's and early 1960's when government started getting involved, i was able to go to college and you won't believe what the prices were. you know, i could get a semester's worth of tuition for $325. of course, i -- you know, some

of the money that i was spending to go to college, i had saved as a kid mowing lawns and work in the drugstore at 35 cents an hour. all prices were down. there was more value. i could have two or three jobs. i could work all summer. there was never this question. now the jobs that are more difficult to get real wages don't go up with the inflation. inflation will go up faster than real wages. that's why people in trouble today is because real wages have not gone up since 1971. since we got off of the gold standard. i know what you should do to prevent it. how this is going to transpire, i predicted that congress would never allow people to be thrown out in the streetses because of this. they will continue to do it until the dollar -- the correction will come when you see the dollar and the bond market collapse because it will be part of a government obligation.

looks like one more. >> right up here. >> hi, dr. paul, thank you so much for coming out. i heard yesterday or the day before that a woman named nancy mace from south carolina is probably going to -- i think she's going to announce tomorrow that she's going to be challenging lindsey graham in the republican primary. [applause] and i wanted to know if you would be potentially making an endorsement in that race? >> it's very likely. [applause] several, three or four people had been talking about running against him. a couple of state senators, a couple had endorsed me, this sort of thing. if she is the candidate,

obviously, you -- for my talking, you can tell i'm interest in a lot of educational projects. they aren't on the top priority. tell you what, that race will get my attention, let me tell you. it looks like time has run out. that will do it. thank you very much. i appreciate the invitation. [applause] >> one more surprise for the attendees, if you have a name badge, dr. paul has graciously accepted the opportunity to take pictures with the attendees. that's right, we'll remember you.

so the way to do this, don't rush. there's no need to rush. everyone will get a picture. but we're going to form a line out here. it will go outside. out down this hallway through this door and then come right here. our vicious leader ed king will prevent everybody or will make the line run smoothly and if you could, we're going to take official photography with a gauge up front. but don't worry about having the camera or anything. take the photo for you to make you move quickly. if you do have a name badge, you're an attendee, single file lineup and we'll take photos. [captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] everybody, please line up outside the front left door right by the -- >>@1:00 we will be at the national press club.

in washington she will talk about her future political plans. in june she began a filibuster that lasted 10 hours against the texas abortion bill. it eventually passed. you can see her marks live at 1:00 eastern. also live, the new jersey senate democratic primary debate. this election is being held to fill the seat of frank lautenberg. coverage courtesy of new jersey public television. 1:00, remarks from wendy davis from the national press club. until then, a discussion on the amount of money the pentagon spends on generals and admirals.

host: we are joined by todd harrison at the center for strategic and budgetary assessments in washington. this is a subject that received scrutiny in washington following the fallout of the scandal involving david petraeus. it has come up again as the department of defense eyes and additional cuts. here's a headline -- are all these cuts going to come from the lower ranks, or do there need to be cuts at the top as well? is still to be

determined how they will make these cuts. it is fair to say that the cuts will have to be proportionate, at the senior officer ranks will be cut in proportion to the junior ranks. the senior ranks have swollen at a greater pace over the past few years than the general force. and the drawdown there might need to be reshuffling. one of the areas where the general and flag level officers has grown has been the joint staff and -- in the office of secretary of defense, and that is an area that the secretary of defense highlighted for cuts. he is calling for a 20% cut in the budgets of those organizations. let's give some numbers. this according to the white

house and the office of senator tom coburn. four-star generals in the active u.s. forces. general and senior flag officers, a little under 1000. officers in general, about 237,000 and about 1.1 million enlisted. when you talk about a higher ranking folks, talk about the job that they do now. are all of them in command of soldiers on the battlefield? talk about some of the jobs they perform. guest: they are not in command of soldiers in the battlefield. they do not have that many troops deployed. they are the head of perhaps an acquisition organization or they run an acquisition program themselves, or they run some component of the headquarters staff or they are in the joint staff. a lot of them are doing senior level management-type jobs. the interesting thing is, we look at the compensation of general officers, and you are

talking cash compensation, they typically make around $200,000 a year, some a little more, some a little less depending on rank. but the cost is all of the staff that goes with them. a four-star officer does not travel anywhere by himself. they often will travel in a small motorcade. they will have a number of people who go with them, go ahead of them, security to go with them. so, there are a lot of expenses. host: let's give the folks numbers on monthly pay. officers with 20 years of service, according to the department of defense. these numbers that we are going to show you don't include a retirement, health, and some of the benefits. monthly pay for a four-star general or admiral, almost $16,000. three-star lieutenant general or vice admiral, almost $14,000. two star major general, rear

admiral, $13,000. one star brigadier general rear admiral, almost $12,000. we look at examples of yearly salaries as well. four-star general or an admiral with about 40 years of service, yearly salary about $217,000 a year, colonel or navy captain with 25 years service, $154,000 a year, master sergeant 20 years service, $90,000, corporal or senior airman with four years, $52,000 a year. todd harrison, tom coburn has been big on possibly looking at these numbers and finding savings. he pointed out recently, he compared the numbers of admirals and senior officers with our world war ii levels. he noted that during world war ii, we had a 12 million person military and about 2000 generals were flag officers. now we have about a 2.5 million

active and reserve military force and about 1000 generals and flag officers. are there places for cuts? talk about the proposal tom coburn put on the table? guest: the proportions of change because the nature of warfare and the nature of our military has changed since world war ii. it does not necessarily explain all of it. but, for instance, we now have an all-volunteer force. we rely on a professional military who are more highly trained, highly skilled, and we can be more selective in who we recruit and who we retain. and the systems they operate on the types of missions that they are required to perform are much more complex than in previous decades. so, it is understandable that there would be a bit of rank inflation relative to like the world war ii era. but with that said, we certainly still have a higher proportion of general officers than we used to even just a decade or two ago. there are things they can do to

roll it back. to pick up on your point on compensation levels, before people start calling in saying i don't make that much in the military, that is cash compensation. total cash compensation that goes in their paycheck. it is not just basic pay, but it is also allowances for housing, allowances for subsistence. what you did not mention are the tax benefits. those allowances for housing and subsistence are tax-free. for a general officer making $200,000 a year, the tax benefit could be $20,000 a year. $20,000 less the revenue the federal government pays in and lets the payout of the pocket. all told of the tax benefits for uniformed military end up costing the federal government $15 billion a year and lost revenue, so it is significant compensation and it does not even come out of the defense budget. host: taking your calls with

todd harrison, of the center for strategic and budgetary assessments here in d.c. he is a senior fellow studying the defense budget. you can give us a ring and we will take your comments and your questions. the phone lines are open. host: as you are calling in, we want to show a clip of defense secretary chuck hagel talking about the growth of military pay obligations and what it means for the pentagon. [video clip] >> one post-9/11 war is over, and the second, our nation's longest war, is coming to an end. overall personnel costs have risen dramatically. some 40% above inflation since

2001. the department cannot afford to sustain this growth. reflecting these realities, the president's fiscal year 2014 budget included a package of modest compensation related reforms that had the strong support of our uniformed leadership. congress has signaled its opposition to some of these proposals, including modest increases in tri-care fees for working age retirees, but given our current fiscal situation, dod has no choice but to consider compensation changes of greater magnitude for military and civilian personnel. host: todd harrison, that is a proposal chuck hagel has put on the table. flesh it out a little bit more for us. guest: after he gave a press briefing, a small group of us from think tanks were allowed to have a meeting with secretary hagel and we are able to asking questions and flesh it out a little bit. first of all, they are actually not proposing any specific changes right now.

they have outlined a number of options. some of these are options that they tried in the past with congress and they failed to get them implemented. some of them are different takes on similar things. but really what they are doing here with what secretary hagel has laid out is a process. he asked the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the other service chief and the senior enlisted members to get together and put together a set of recommendations and compensation reform and to bring them back. he has given them a target of $50 billion in savings over the next 10 years, which is relatively modest compared to the total amount of military compensation over the next 10 years. i think he's got the right group of people to deliver that message to congress. the reform has got to come from service members themselves if they want to have any chance at \all getting this enacted on the hill.

host: a question from twitter from todd -- what percentage of the overall military budget is in salaries and how many military personnel? guest: 1.4 million in duty and another 800,000 or so in national guard and reserves. compensation makes up about a third of the defense budget. another 800,000 dod civilian employees, and their compensation makes up about $77 billion of the total defense budget. host: we are taking your calls and comments in this segment to todd harrison. phone lines are open. garland from warren, ohio. caller: would one way to take care of this is to increase the level of performance before promotion, before you're passed

over? guest: requiring people to perform at a higher level before they are promoted? caller: before they are passed over -- they make get passed over -- before they were not, but now they would be. guest: yes, that is one of the ways dod handles reducing compensation costs and reducing the size of the force, is to reduce promotion rates. now, we actually had a bit of the opposite happening the past decade, particularly in the army. there were points around 2005 or 2006 where the army had a shortage of officers in the middle ranks, so they were promoting people at a very high rate, not seen in previous times. now we are at a point where there are people in the senior ranks in previous times who would not have made it. that is a question now, something they are going to have to deal with. one way to reduce the total size

of the force to reduce your total compensation costs is to be a bit tougher on who you promote and allow people to leave. host: jack from new jersey to talk to todd harrison of the center for strategic studies. jack, good morning to you. caller: good morning. how are you? host: go ahead, you are on the air. caller: ok, the reason why i called was that you made a comment earlier that general officer might make -- did you say 30,000? guest: about $200,000 a year. caller: i think it is more than that. i think they are up to $4000 or $5,000 a month, closer to 60,000 or $70,000. one thing i find interesting --

you might know this more than i do -- but if you are low ranking enlisted with a wife and two children, i believe you can qualify for food stamps. there is quite a disparity between the retired and enlisted ranks. the other cost i think is not picked up by the military is the v.a. i'm quite familiar with that. i am a vietnam veteran, and i collected disability from the v.a. but that's all i really wanted to comment on, those two things. host: let's let todd harrison jump in. guest: several things. in terms of the pay in terms of members of the uniform military,

you can look it up online. there is a good calculator out there that dod puts out there. i do not have the web address off the top of my head, but if you google military pay, you will find it. there is a dod website where you can look it up. rank, years of service, number of dependents, and it will give you the cash compensation so you can see for yourself how much the general officers are making. as far as the food stamp question, that was an issue years ago. a very low ranking enlisted person with a large number of dependents, in certain circumstances there were some members of the military who were qualifying for food stamps. congress took note of that. they took a number of steps to prevent that from occurring. prevent that from occurring. to the best of my knowledge, that is an extremely rare situation today. you would have to be a very low rank, e1, e2, e3, and you would have to have a very large number of dependents, more than two children and a spouse. it is not something that is as

much of a concern today. of course, if that ever happens, that is indefensible, and we should not let it happen. the last point i think you had in their war veterans cost, the cost of veterans benefits and services. these are funded through the department of veterans affairs and not through the department of defense, though they are not part of the defense budget. talking about things like g.i. bill for educational benefits, which the new g.i. bill now, a service member earns credit that they can use to pay for college tuition, that is transferable to their dependents as well. so, serving in the military, you could actually pass it on to your children when they are ready to go to college. but other things like veterans disability, veteran's health care, all of those things are funded by the department of veterans affairs. that budget right now for monday 14, they requested $150 billion, much higher than it used to be. just before president obama took

office it was just that $100 billion a year and these funds are not subject to sequestration, so they are not being cut like the rest of the federal budget. host: todd harrison is from the answer for strategic and budgetary assessments, csbaonline.org. talk about what your group does and where you get your funding. guest: we are a nonprofit, nonpartisan defense think tank. we focus on issues like national security strategy and resources. that is where i come in on the budget side, resources side. we get funding from a number of different sources, through private foundations, grants. we do some work with the department of defense and others. a variety of sources fund our organization. host: how long have you been there? guest: a little over four years. host: what did you do before? guest: i was a contractor with booz allen hamilton, and i worked with the air force and other department of defense organizations helping them with their acquisition programs. host: we are talking about pay

and funding for some of the top military commanders. we mentioned at the beginning of the petraeus scandal puts a spotlight on this. here's an article from november 17, 2012, talking about the issue. it noted that commanders who lead the nation's military services and those who oversee troops around the world and enjoy an array of free work with it benefiting a billionaire him including an executive jet, palatial homes, drivers, security guard, and aides to carry their bags, press their uniforms and track their scheduled in 10 minute increments. their food is prepared by gourmet chefs. if they want music with dinner parties, their staffs consummate -- some in a string quartet and choir. tell us about the fallout from that scandal and how it focuses on this issue? guest: my favorite story is while he was traveling overseas,

he required his aides to give him fresh sliced pineapple just before he went to bed every night. it certainly gave the impression that some of these general officers like petraus were pampered. and quite frankly, in my dealings with general officers, i have seen it as well. i have been to their homes for dinners in the evening, and they will have a chef who cooks for them and their family in their home and often times this chef will not even be a low ranking person but be a rather high- ranking senior enlisted person who works as a chef. it is kind of amazing all the perks that go with being a general officer, including the business jets. talking gulfstream type, private

business jet that they can fly around the country in the world. i think most people would be surprised at the level of benefits of these general officers command. host: one of the arguments is some of these folks would probably make a whole lot more money working in the private sector, if they were not serving in the military. guest: and they often do. after they leave the military they will go on and take positions in industry and make a lot of money. but i think the difference is when you are in private industry, it is private money paying for it. when you are in government service, it is taxpayer money. i think that is what is what issue comes in. host: after the focus on the general petraeus candle, was anything done to ratchet back the spending on maybe the perks or salary? guest: not as far as i have seen. i can give you a good example. even in the pentagon they had these executive dining facilities for very high-ranking military and civilian people. it is not just enough to have one executive dining facility, you have to have three in the pentagon. i have eaten in one of them. they are very nice. but you have to wonder in times of austerity and we are trying to cut back and focus on maintaining the quality of life

for their troops, maintaining military readiness and combat and military capabilities, it makes you wonder why we are maintaining facilities like that. host: we are taking your calls and comments with todd harrison. watertown, south dakota, on the republican line. good morning, ike. caller: i do not understand the discussion on the military pay side. my son has been in there for over 20 years now, and every time he moves, if he moves from one camp to another with his family, he always ends up in a debted situations because of the finances he has to undergo to get to camp. he is in germany now. he don't sweat his duty or anything, but i see these guys from the irs and these other guys from the government, i see

them shrinking their duty. we're not complaining all wholeheartedly on television about that. guest: you know, that is one of the hardships of military duty is you are required to move quite a bit, move your entire family often all over the country and around the world. interestingly, that is expensive for the military. when the military causes you to relocate, they do pay your moving expenses. of course, there could be additional expenses you might incur, especially if you own a home somewhere and you have to leave at home and you have trouble selling it or renting it out to someone else. you could end up losing money. but just to put it in perspective, the military spends about $4.6 billion a year just moving members of the military. $4.6 billion a year. because if you are an officer and you want to make it to

higher ranks, you have to hold a lot of different jobs and check the box on a lot of different types of experience if you want to make it to higher ranks. so, we have people moving. often if you look at the bios of general officers, you can see the change jobs every year and a half to two years, and that is quite common in the military. host: we talk about the pay and compensation for some of the most senior members of the military. here is a piece from someone retired from the army, he is a nbc news military analyst and author with a piece talking about the issue. he noted that it looks as though the navy will soon have more admirals than ships.

host: talk about some of the history of the proposals to maybe make some cuts in whether it is compensation or some of the other perks that senior military commanders have gotten over the years. guest: going back to secretary gates, former secretary of defense, he noted the problem as well, that there were too many high level general and flag level officers and their ranks needed to be reduced. but it is a hard thing to do. it will take time. when it comes to compensation, there hasn't been a lot of effort to really force compensation reform on the senior-level officers, in particular. it has been a broad effort. i think part of that is because the people who are going to be recommending changes, even under the new process set up by

secretary hagel, to have the chairman of the joint chiefs and senior advisors to come up with recommendations on compensation reform, it is better senior- level people who will be coming back with those recommendations. the system as it currently is really works for them. it works quite well. who it doesn't work for all that well, where there may be some inefficiencies in our compensation system, are the 80% of people who join the military and do not make a career of it. 80% who did not stay 20 years to earn all of the retiree healthcare benefits. the question is, in compensation reform, who will speak for the other 80%? about half the people who join the military only served for five years or less before they get out. who will speak to them -- for them when it comes about reforming compensation? what i fear is the reform the joint chiefs will come back with will basically be across-the- board. let's reduce the pay scale.

let everyone take a smaller pay raise than they otherwise would have been given. those types of reforms, they tend to cut the forms of compensation the lower ranking people value the most. host: we are talking with todd harrison from the center for strategic and budgetary assessment. you can catch up with him on twitter and you can also go to csbaonline.org. the next 10 or 15 minutes in the segment we have left we have a line for active military. we want to get your take on the pay levels for some of the most senior levels in our unit -- u.s. military. jason is on that line from san diego, california. independent. you are on with todd harrison. caller: good morning.

i am active duty naval officer in san diego. i served in afghanistan in the heyday of halliburton. i was wondering, i know there have been a lot of cuts with the contractors, the military hires. my experience in afghanistan, you have these contractors making two, three times as much active duty military doing the same job. what are your comments? guest: we talk about contractors. it is important to divide up what type of contractor we are talking about. there are the wartime contingency contractors that you were speaking of. many of them in iraq and afghanistan. i know just a year or two ago we had it as many contractors working in afghanistan as we did active duty troops. when we had about 100,000 troops in the surge, we had about 100,000 contractors working as well. fairly new occurrence.

using contractors at that scale. it is new for the united states. the other type of contractors are the service support contractor, like i used to be at booz allen, where you are basically providing systems engineering or technical analysis or administrative services for the department of defense. the third category of contractors are what i like to call the mental benders, they actually make the product dod buys. the last category, if you will, dod actually does not have much insight or control over the size of that contractor workforce. that is determined by the defense industry. dod just places orders for equipment, and the industry figures out how to fill the orders and what the work force should be. that is not something dod can control directly. when it comes to service support contractors like booz allen, saic, you name it, that is something dod can control.

but they also unfortunately do not track the headcount so they cannot tell you accurately how many of these service support contractors they actually employ. estimates are that it is somewhere close to one million service support contractors employed by dod. if you walk around the pentagon, it is easy to believe it. there are many of them. and you have the contingency contractors we used during wartime. contingency contractors are coming down as we draw down our forces from afghanistan. so, that is naturally going to run its course. but it is a good question for future conflicts, how much we want to rely on contractors for doing things. in previous conflicts like vietnam, korea, world war ii, we used our soldiers for a lot of tasks that really were not unique to the military. the image of soldiers peeling potatoes back in world war ii. we don't use our troop for that anymore.

we have an all volunteer force. they are more expensive per person and are much more highly skilled. it would be a waste of have them doing things like food service, so we are contracting out things like food service and base facility upkeep, laundry, things like that, for deployed troops. they are being done by contractors. some of those contractors, about 10% to 15% are doing things that really do start to overlap with what our troops are there for, like providing security services. but it is a good question, what do we do for future conflicts with contingency contractors. host: the generals to soldiers ratio, we compare it world war ii to today. how does drone warfare and a more complex battlefield play into the argument of how many soldiers in general there should be in today's military? guest: it is an interesting situation.

just at the turning point, using automation and unmanned systems for more of our military capabilities. i don't think it really has changed the force structure just yet, but in the future, it really could. now we have troops that can be flying a uav that is armed or unarmed and those troops can be located in nevada or new mexico or wherever, sitting out of a trailer flying this thing remotely and you need only a minimal force in the theater to launch and recover the aircraft and do any maintenance on the aircraft. so, i think it could potentially have a significant impact on the structure of our all volunteer force and what types of skills we need and what ranks we need people in. you can imagine, for things like unmanned systems that can be operated remotely continent away, that you can do more and more of that with members of the guard and reserve. you can pull them up very quickly.

they can go in, they can train. you know, realistically, using simulators because that is exactly what they are flying anyway. looking at a monitor with a joystick, and they can actually perform combat missions quite easily, and they do not actually have to be deployed overseas, so you can use them more readily. host: a comment and then a question from twitter. marcus writes in -- we must remember the importance of retaining talented leaders. another viewer writes in -- guest: i think a certain amount of our entire compensation system is really a holdover of what we inherited from the british. if you look at the idea of half pay for life after service, it goes all the way back to the british, where we got it from.

we have not always followed that, and we have altered it in different periods in our history but i think a lot of what we have inherited today -- i mean, just the division between officers and enlisted in the military, it is not something you see in the rest of our society where you have two parallel tracks and very little crossing over from one to the other. that is something that is carried forward in the military. it used to be a simple division was, the enlisted guys did not have a college education and officers do. but that is not true anymore. you see a lot of our enlisted service members, not only do they have college degrees but they have graduate degrees, masters and ph.d.'s. so, carrying over this kind of antiquated system of once you go in as enlisted, if you want to

switch to an officer, you have to start over as second lieutenant, i really wonder whether or not it is something that needs to continue into the future. host: we are talking with todd harrison from the center for strategic and budgetary assessment. dennis is up next from montclair, new jersey, on our independent line. good morning, dennis. caller: can you hear me? ok. i go back to the korean war, when i received $29 a month and my wife received $75 a month and we were supposed to live on it. that was the beginning of the korean war. however, my question is, i understand that the end of world war ii there was five four-star generals, around 1944, five four-star generals. how many four-star generals do we have today?

guest: i think you had the number early. host: 35 four-star generals today, just under 1000 general and senior flag officers. caller: that just told you something about what is happening to our military. guest: and thank you for your service in the korean era. i think it does show there has been some rank inflation in the military. as i said earlier, part of that is due to the changes in warfare, the changes in the way that we fight. some of it is necessary. but in recent years it seems like some of that may have been excessive and something that could be rolled back over time. host: dale from ohio on our democratic line. good morning. caller: i have a question mainly on the retirement part of this. they call social security and medicare an entitlement.

why is the service members, government workers, their pensions and insurance not considered an entitlement, too? i don't distinguish the difference in the two. maybe you can explain this. guest: in a technical sense, in the budget there is no category for entitlement in the budget. you have discretionary spending and mandatory spending. things like social security, medicare, medicaid, they come out of mandatory category spending. things like military retirement pay and veterans benefits and services also come out of mandatory accounts. "entitlement" has become a politically loaded word. it is often used to describe social security and medicare programs like these. i think your point is valid. military retirement system and military health care, for that matter, is an entitlement in the truest sense of the word. -- is something you are in

earn over time and therefore are entitled to by virtue of your status. i have used that phrase inlwhen the past, referring to middle -- military entitlements, a lot of military retirees take offense because of the politically loaded nature of the word. but, you know, on capitol hill, more and more people i talked to say of we're going to perform military compensation and retirement benefits, it really should be done in conjunction when we're doing things to reform social security and medicare. that is something that could be part of a packaged deal in the years to come. >> are there of -- other members that have been pushing for new caps on pay for senior members or the number of senior

military? to mind oft come hand. to put it into perspective, even if you were to completely eliminate the pay, that really does not make a dent in balancing the federal budget or reducing the defense budget. really, it is the accouterments that go with the position. about eliminating the position and the structure overall and a trickle effects that go down. with theght harrison center for strategic budgetary assessments. thank you for joining us today. talking about the political climate in texas and future political plans.

the center for public integrity and the chair of the national press club's speakers' committee. with card in communications and the speaker committee member who organize today's lunch. i think you. bobby patent, a fort worth business leader and owner of the l.a. dodgers. fisher martin, senior executive producer and manager of political programming for nbc news. and marilyn thompson, pierre rode chief for thompson reuters. a host and reporter with voice of russia and blocker for the washington post, she the people log. rick dunham, a political reporter with the houston

chronicle and former national press club president. [applause] it seems now like the whole country was watching when our guests today literally stood up for her belief on the floor of the texas state house. for 12 hours she filibustered of republican-sponsored abortion bill with turf -- on her feet without being able to sit, lead on her dress, or drink water. that made texas senate -- state senator, wendy davis, and he wrote to liberals and pro-choice activists. she began working after school when she was 14 to help support her single mother and three siblings. by 19 she was a single mother herself, working two jobs to make ends meet in hopes of creating a better life for her young daughter. she eventually enrolled in community college, a journey that culminated with a law

degree from harvard. soon after she became a practicing attorney in fort worth and served nine years on the city council. she was recruited to run for the texas senate and scored a huge political upset by defeating a well-entrenched incumbent. in the senate she ran and won in 2008 in a race that was considered one of the biggest upsets in texas politics in recent times. she was reelected in 2012 despite rick perry and every major republican officeholder campaigning against her. her main issues are economic development, education and family issues. she was named pressman legislator of the year in 2009. -- freshman legislator of the year in 2009. she apparently likes the filibuster, because prior to the one that got hurt national attention in 2011, she staged a

public election. that filibuster temporarily blocked the cut and set the stage for the legislature restoring most of the money in 2013. she has been mentioned as a possible and senatorial candidates in texas. gubernatorial candidates in texas. we're hoping she may tip the cards for what the future might hold. please help us give a warm welcome to senator wendy davis. [applause] >> thank you. me hereu all for having today, and thank you, angela, for inviting me to be here. it is a pleasure to be such -- to be with such an esteemed group of people. i have to tell you people get a little bit nervous when i approached the podium these

days. you obviously know what happened on june 25 in the texas legislature, but in case you were one of the few people not live streaming it, i thought i would repeat the entire thing for you today. let's get comfortable. in all seriousness, i am very honored and so grateful you are interested in hearing more from me. i am constantly reminded what a privilege it is to have of voice. though i mean the voice figuratively, my initial understanding of the power of voice was quite literal. when i was a young girl my family tried to spend as much time as we could with my grandparents. they lived in the panhandle of texas. my grandfather made his living his entire life as a tenant farmer, and when he was in his

a massiveuffered stroke. from that point forward, he lived the rest of his life in a nursing home. he was partially paralyzed and had a very difficult time forming words because of his paralysis. when my mother and siblings and i would pile into my mom's old volkswagen and drive to visit him, we would pick him up at the nursing home and keep him in his home for the weekend with us. ofsome point on several those occasions he would beckoned me into the kitchen, and i would sit with him at their old formica table, the one that has the silver band that goes around the side.

as you can imagine, he is sitting there in his wheelchair, stuck toy tiny legs their plastic chairs on a hot summer day. it was a lot of hard work. it was slow, and it could be very difficult. it was challenging, not just for me, -- for him, but me as well. invariably on those occasions my grandfather would start crying, which meant i would start crying, too. it is a very hard lesson for a nine-year-old to witness the despair in her grandfather's experience drove home a very powerful lesson for me, the importance of having a voice. how painful it is to lose it,

and how important it is to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves and to be true to what they would say if they could. many of you heard my name for the first time last month when it, as allison said, and the last hours of the texas legislative session the powers decided to pass not just an abortion bill, but a bill that would block healthcare access to tens of thousands of women across the state of texas. in the process, these partisan lawmakers were seeking to rob texas women of their voice. whim when women -- when women the capitol toe caat testify, many of them were turned away and unable to give voice to an issue that had a very real impact on their lives. thate i took the floor

morning for the longest 13 hours of my life, i worked with staff to track down testimony that had been committed in testimony hearings but had not been read. during the next hour read it -- read every single one of their stories out loud. these were real people with very personal stories to tell. never given had voice to their story before to another human being. at first my staff was reading them a little too fast, because 13 hours is a long time to fill. by the time the day was over we

have received over 16,000 personal stories. 16,000 people hungering to be hurt. i have to tell you, at some point in the day i stopped worrying about running out of time or stories and instead, i started worrying about running out of time. when i stood up but i guess that day, i had no doubt that filibustering the bill was the right thing to do, but i had no idea it would trigger -- trigger such an overwhelmingly positive response across the state, across the country. there was an outpouring of for texas women. the most remarkable thing about it is stories that otherwise never would of been told were suddenly national news. heard in support of my filibuster that night are not the ones we normally hear

amplified across the state of texas. i think a lot of people who live outside our states are surprised they even exist. texans know the voices in our state that shout the loudest have not often been the ones that speak for everyone. that night to the nation was introduced to a force within our state. a force that will have a lot to say. we have an outside influence on the direction of the nation, and many americans are ready see texas as the gateway to a better life. we are the nation's no. 1 destination for internal migration. the reason, as any texan will tell you, is we have a lot to be

proud of. there is are very diverse and fast-growing economy. our abundant natural and energy resources. our long coastline, and low unemployment and low cost of living and an appointment. just as importantly, there is the fervent belief that a better tomorrow for ourselves and children is just within our reach. seen texanse i have create those tomorrows for themselves and family. i have seen them graze themselves up by the bootstraps , and byheir slang backs pink running shoes. texans were card, and we believe hard work should pay off. the majority of texans know our state is stronger when it makes the investments in people that helped them reach their full potential.

and yes, texans know there are areas where we can and must do better. one out of every 10 public- school students in the united states goes to school in texas. yet we produce the lowest percentage of high-school graduates in the entire country. liveourth of our children in poverty. we do have a lot to be proud of, and we're joined by a few of the texas leaders who not only know we can do better, but are hoping to make texas better. we have some of them in our audience today. we have our county commissioner.

to behrilled beach -- joined by a community leader and school board trustee. my incredible, beautiful sister in the texas senate who was the one who asked finely at what point it would take for a woman's voice to be heard in the texas senate? former congressman martin frost. city councilman joe burns who represents a city council. my old city council district in fort worth. justice of the peace. we haveead table amazing people with us today. you have been introduced a little bit to them. bobby patent is a local business leader. he truly defines what it means to be at texas success story. adrienne at the garcia and my

very dear friend and said that colleague. [applause] these leaders, amazing leaders are a part of a growing movement to build a state that is more their voices are drowned out too often. who hope that shouting will

distract from real solutions. they are doing serious damage to the lives and opportunities of the texans the claim to represent. they brag about low unemployment, while at the tame -- same time dramatically underfunding texas education. they travel to states as far away as california and new york, trying to lure business to texas, while at the same time ignoring the needs of high your education system to make sure opportunities are available to all of our young texans. soon as we know the consequence of that will be we will probably have to travel to other states. what not being true to people in texas are actually sitting -- setting. -- saying.

it would be as a pretending to listen to what my grandfather had to say in writing down what ever i felt. you all know the saying, and some of you know the song, this ain't my first rodeo. in 2011 i took a stand against a partisan plan to strip $5.4 billion from our already very underfunded public school system. i do not know if you are aware of this, but after that budget cuts went into place, texas 51 in what itof is investing in the future of the school system in this country. i wanted to filibuster because it helps put us into a special session where teachers and parents finally had an opportunity to come to the

capital and be heard. it was very important to me their voices be part of the conversation, and here is why, because i have seen firsthand that education is absolutely a pathway from poverty. 30 years ago i could not have ofgined standing in front you, standing in washington before a group of people like you. life looked then my so very different. it looked a lot like my mom's life. my mom has a sixth grade education. after my parents divorced, she had no husband, no financial security and for children to raise. every meal my mother put on our table was a struggle for her. by the time i was 19 i also was already married and divorced

and raising a young daughter myself, living in poverty and facing the same challenges and hardships i had seen my mother face. i was always on the brink of the financial disaster back then. a flat tire on my car meant having to choose a belonging to a pond. opted for me it was 99 cents pizza rolls. experiences like that can ,bsolutely zero of your vision

crush your optimism. for me, it came down to a simple calculation. if i really wanted to make a better life for amber, had a responsibility to improve my own. it was with a heart full of love for her that i started the journey. at the time i was working as a receptionist for a pediatrician. even though my paycheck was small, it was worth it to work there. i have no health insurance but my daughter had free medical care and medicine and free formula. one day at work one of the nurses came in and dropped a pamphlet on my desk for tarrant county community college. i had always thought of college as belonging to someone else, but that day and started to believe perhaps it could belong to me, too. the state of texas helped making

-- by making it affordable, even for a single mother like me. i still work full-time and waited tables four nights a week. while it was not easy, in the texas i grew up in, it was possible. when i transferred to texas christian university, received scholarships that covered the cost of my tuition. but today, students facing the same challenges that i once based are unfortunately not able to receive the same kind of assistance. i have a women's health care

clinic very close to where i lived. for those next few years that is where i received the entirety of my health care. today of course, in texas, partisan legislation on top of years of severe budget cuts have cut that access from tens of thousands of women across the state. each of them has lost the only health care they have ever known. regardless of your politics, i think everyone would agree that is just bad policy. go toe i was able to college and law school, i was able to be a part of starting small businesses and to become part of contributing back to the economy of my state. that is how it works. suret so very much to make more people have the chance to do that. the challenges i have taken on as a legislator are about two

things. a pass and a voice. in texas we do not run for local office with a party affiliation next door name. i got in the habit of working on issues that are not considered natural for democrats from shale gas drilling to transportation planning to serving as the chair of the city economic development committee and fostering a great deal of economic development and troop height -- private/public partnerships.

the people i represent are a lot more interested in seeing problems solved and they are in partisan label. one thing you should know about the texas capital is we did not have to cross and i'll to work across party lines because there really is no idle. instead when we want to work with the republican colleague, i simply say to my chair across the senate floor, and we begin. for example, in the last legislative session i work with a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers to pass equal work, -- equal pay for equal work legislation. even though there were republican lawmakers who were willing to work with me to see

this injustice made right, anernor perry in what was overtly partisan move vetoed that bill. that not only undercuts the potential of texas women but makes texas a less attractive place to do business. texas families are paying the price. having been there, i understand how precious those few dollars can be. much of a difference it can make. that is why my real passion has been consumer reform. if you have ever had to go to a pawn shop for a payday lender in texas, and i have, you know texas is the wild, wild west when it comes to the predatory lending industry. head as therned its industry siphons dollars from the local economy entraps hard- working families into a cycle of

debt they cannot escape. i have worked closely with an unlikely coalition of folks to try to address the issue from the christian life commission to defensep to the department because of the fact that so many military members are subjected to those practices. i have also worked to ensure state agencies operate with oversight, transparency, and a commitment to being affected is the words of taxpaying dollars. in texas some officials have turned the state agencies into cash cows and favor factories to further their own interests and to reward their donors. all of rhetoric, and i know we all hear it about the government and small government, texans want what i think everyone wants, they just want to see good government. i continue to take on issues people did not always associate

with democrats. these problems do not have a party affiliation. we helped to create better in court to recognize veteran service and their unique needs. we want them back on the feet and back in the job force. [applause] i have been a strong advocate for transportation.

i have fought to help rape victims like christie. i have fought to get a rate evidence kit on every shelf. it is a very important way to make community safer and to provide victims and their families the comfort of knowing their attackers will be prosecuted. those are just a few examples of how important it is to find common ground. withwant to leave you this, i will seek common ground, because we all must, but sometimes you have to take a stand on sacred ground.

liberty, the freedom to choose what is your future will hold. in the past few weeks i have had so many young women tell me how much it meant to them to see me stand up for them and to be standing alongside them. after the filibuster i've had more than a few come to me and simply cry. what i see in their peers are not tears of the feet. instead, their understanding that even if only for a short while, their voices, as much as mine, made a land -- a difference in the landscape of what was happening in the state of texas. they were feeling the empowerment of discovery. the moment of realization that they had a voice. it is a powerful feeling. i know because i remember the

first moment that i discovered my own. you may think the moment came when i walked across the state of harvard law school to except by diploma. or you may think it came when i raised my hand for the first time to be sworn into public office, but actually it happened in front of a bookshelf at tarrant county community college. be my veryt was to first college book. i will never forget the feeling of that book in my hands. incredible and overpowering moment. farther than anyone in my family had ever gotten and farther than i have ever hoped for myself. i know how proud of my mother was, because i know how proud i was of my girls on their first day of college. texan deserves that

moment. deserves a voice, and every texan needs to know the future belongs to all of us, and we all can play a role in shaping it. the leaders who capture this spirit will be the ones who write the next chapter in texas story, and america's story. as i learned that sitting at the kitchen table with my grandfather, the task may not be easy, and it may not be but it is important. itis essential, and together can be done. thank you very, very much. [laughter] [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] 3]

>> thank you. we have a lot of questions, and many of them, as you might imagine, are along the same theme. let's just get this out of the way right away. you mentioned your feud with rick perry. are you thinking about running to succeed him as governor? to go a lot of people are asking me that question lately, as you can imagine, and i am working very hard to decide what my neck steps will be. i do think in texas people feel we need a change from the very fractured, very partisan leadership we're seeing in the state government right now. what about a bid for another

state office, perhaps u.s. senator or lieutenant governor? >> i can say i will run for either my state senate seat or the governor. [applause] >> one more question. this person asks, would you consider running as dp candidates with hillary clinton? -- vp candidate? [applause] >> in answer to that, we will have to find out whether she is planning to run for president first. what can you parlay this into next? >> i do think the extraordinary what i talked about

in my speech. and continuing the conversation in texas. not just about reproductive rights. whether it is the dramatic defunding of public education that has put us into a battle in texas really is not listening to families.

i think it can be attributed to the fact that so many people feel disconnected. they feel like it does not matter. it would be a share to -- it would be making sure i played a part to fix that in texas. rules didegislative you consider when planning the filibuster, those that help you do that for so many hours and those that might have hurt? take of their roles in the texas senate for filibuster are very different than they are here in d.c. and the u.s. senate.

i am touching the podium right now. i could not have touched my desk. no water, no bathroom breaks, no food, and you must talk continuously, and talk on topic, at least relatively so. that had been the tradition in the texas senate and has been respected. the filibuster that i conducted, senator alice and others would agree, they have been their lot longer than i was, it was subjected to extraordinary scrutiny he that had never occurred before. in fact, the day before i started the filibuster the senator who was quite well-known for filibustering built in the

senate came in to give me advice. he said it is not that bad, you can lean on your desk, you can have a few hard candies in your pocket. people on occasion have been known to get ice chips on the senate floor, it will be fine. getid not take very long to that response from many of my responses from colleagues in the senate that day.

we saw the senate colleagues using the rules so masterfully to argue procedures, and we were watching the clock ticking, taking. ultimately, when even they could not succeed after taking the football and running down the in theith the people gallery all day long, so respectful. they finally had had enough.

it was such a force of voice and such a wonder. many politicians and reporters. describe what else was included and what you saw as the most damaging provisions in that measure. >> republicans would like everyone to believe that is what that bill was about, but in texas, 0.57% of those procedures occur after 20 weeks. the dramatic numbers of those were in a situation where a very well-loved baby has been found

to have very severe problems. instead what the bill was really about, and disappointing this has not been enough of the conversation, it was about closing women's access to a very important health-care service in the state of texas, because these clinics are dual purpose in many instances. by the rules there with three other pieces. one was ambulatory surgical center standards would have to be adhered to, though the sponsor could not point to a single reason about the rules that would make clinics any safer and could not point to any problems that existed in texas. they will only be inspected

every three-six years appeared at a lot of us had a hard time understanding how that would make the climb a safer for women. there was also, equally as damaging, a provision that doctors must be licensed to practice, have the admitting privileges at a hospital with and a short distance of these clinics. again, no real reason could be provided for why that was important, but what it will do, and clearly those who advocated for it understand it will severely constrained the practitioners in the arena and their bike, constrained the service. -- and therefore, constrain the service. the verya drug used in early stages of a pregnancy. right now, under the law, a doctor administers it to a patient. there are two doses taken.

they are taken at home. many patients select to do that. in texas, the first dose must be given up a surgical center. no one can describe why that needs to happen. the second dose must also occur at the ambulatory surgical center and then the woman must come back to weeks later for a follow-up visit. prior to that, of because of the law that passed last session, she also has to have had a sonogram. four visits a woman must make. for many women traveling great distances, in many of them have to. it is estimated 37 of the 42 clinics will close, women will literally keep lose access to care.

many doctors argued against that bill. there was a lot more to the build of they would like for you to think there was. >> could you discuss what legal limits you do support? take out the supreme court has made that decision. it is one of the protected liberties under our constitution. i respect our constitutional protections in place today, whether it be for this purpose or whether it be for other protective purposes of the constitution. i do not think we can pick and choose. >> four little boys and girls are considering that they may

someday serve as elected official, what advice do you have for them? >> for a little boys and girls. >> the thing i find most wonderful about serving has been to pieces of my life have come together in a way that i feel is perfect for me. one is the journey to get here, and the hearts and understanding i have four people, but also, the incredibly excellent education i was able to receive. those things combined have served me well in my public service capacity. for anyone wishing to pursue a public service career, i would ask them first to listen to their heart, see what it is truly their passionate about and motivates them and get a good education. hopefully one day in texas we will provide more and more of those four young people to find their way along that path.

>> what is your reaction to the fact that governor perry is considering a 2016 repeat of a presidential bid? responses toee that. [laughter] i think that is all i am going to say about that. >> would you like to give us those responses? take dow[laughter] office to youwide think democrats have the best chance of winning in texas? >> i think the question really is, what chance do new leaders have of winning elected office in the state of texas? i think the best place to start the conversation is to talk about what texans want to see in their government and not to talk about it and party frames. i represent a senate district that many consider to be

republican one. it's certainly a swing district at least. the people that i represent have never wanted to have a conversation about party. they want conversations about problems and what my proposed solutions for the problems are. the best chance we have of bringing new leadership in texas, i think will look a lot like that. askspe this questioner which this -- what is keeping texas from shading more purple? why is it so hard for democrats to win that state-wide office? >> first of all, people have to run. second of all, i think back to the point i made earlier, we have a very low voter participation in texas. our current attorney general has done everything he can to the press that as much as possible.

i think there is an opportunity, not to be thinking about this in terms of red, purple, or blue, but to be thinking about it in terms of thinking about the true values texas families hold and encouraging and inspiring them in a way they feel engaged to participate again. >> a couple of questions about when you think democrats might achieve parity in texas with republicans. parity will be at the choice of voters. i think what we have seen in texas we of seen all over the country where the districts have been drawn through redistricting

process -- processes that have taken place over the past couple of decades. that has meant conversations only take place at the extreme party level. in texas, where a dramatic number are republicans, all the conversations really being had in the political arena, which is the best place for public discourse on issues, are taking place at the very far right extremists. it is not reflective of who people in texas really are. i think parity will really come, to be able to engage with people with their value and hopefully getting them to think about things that anyway. party does the democratic become attractive to texas hispanics while advocating strong pro-choice policies? >> the latino community in texas

is no different than the anglo or african-american community. are quickleaders who to care about and work on things that are going to matter to their families. everyone wants to go -- to prioritize economic development. those values translate across ethnic lines and can certainly and absolutely most certainly are being better represented by the democrats in texas than they are elsewhere.

do you think hillary clinton will run? to go i think she can do anything she sets her mind to. >> there is a lot of buzz and washington about the castro brothers and texas. which one has the better chance of winning statewide office? extraordinarych people. we are so lucky to have young, emerging leaders like them. i think the sky is the limit for them. i think they both have incredible opportunity to them. the moment they decide to set the put -- set their foot on the path to make it happen, and they will see it happen. ceciled you like to see richards return? >> she is an extraordinary human being. we spent a lot of time together over the past few weeks because

of the issues we have been talking about in texas. she is confronting this battle as the executive director of planned parenthood all over the country. she has a special place in her heart for texas because of her mother's history there and the richards. the work so incredibly hard to get elected. they are true believers when it comes to grass-roots conversations and organizing. they are true believers in the fact that we can have leaders that will reflect real people in real communities all over the state of texas. she sets her mind to something and will do it. i would welcome her back to texas. i will sign up for her campaign is she wants to run. to you believe the

court ordered and from congressional redistricting laws violate the voting rights act in the wake of the shelby county ruling, and if so, why? >> i absolutely do believe that violate the voting rights act. the reason, i am not sure if you are aware of the distinction that texas holds right now. it is not one for us to be bragging about, but we are the only states that recently went through redistricting for and a court challenge were intentional discrimination was found. i believe in a drawing of congressional maps. i think, because of that intentional discrimination, they will continue to be subject to a voting rights challenge, in spite of the threats to section 5 that shelby county proposed.

the voting rights act is still alive. go away piece that may is the injunctive relief it provided. i think at the end of the day, the court will be consistent with earlier rulings and will find a voting rights act challenge to want to be valid. a war onhas been women. you think it is a real phenomenon? >> we had a couple of examples of why people are feeling that way. one was the issue of reproductive rights. it is falling on the history of number of things happening in texas. in the prior legislative session, there were distinct challenges that were brought back on women health care in texas. one was a challenge to the women's health plan where we

were getting 90 cents of every dollar to the federal tax dollars to -- return to texas to support women's health. it was about $36 million a year. it is now costing us dramatically more in increase in medicaid births that occurred as a consequence of that. these are family planning clinics that do nothing but that. we're not talking about reproductive rights. these are clinics that are providing birth control family planning. they are providing mammograms. they are providing other cancer screenings and blood pressure and diabetes screening.

again, for many women, the only place for women -- where women are receiving their health care in texas. two-thirds of the funding for that was removed in the 2011 budget. literally within months clinics all over the state of texas started closing. at last count we had 56 clinics that had closed. there had been that no return of that service for women since that time. in spite of the fact that we added money to the budget in the last legislative session to accommodate that. the safety net is so badly fractured that putting it back together will take many years. in the meantime, many women will go without their healthcare needs addressed. in the last legislative session the equal pay for equal work bill. it was a lot of work trying to get that bill out of the senate

and out of the house but we did it. after all of that work, to veto the bill and demonstrate that he did not think it was an important issue, that he did not understand how very valuable are part ofomen who a two-party working relationship for a family, how badly it hurts them. >> we're almost out of time. i have a couple of housekeeping matters. i would like to remind you about the upcoming luncheon speakers. september 10, dr. thomas friedman, director for the centers of disease control and prevention. september 17, married fallon, a governor of oklahoma and vice chairwoman of the national

governors' association. november 11, president and ceo of the charles schwab corp.. second, i would like to present our guest with the traditional mass -- national press club coffee mug which we expect to see of the desk if there is another filibuster. >> thank you. [applause] >> for the final question, most of you in the audience cannot see the issues that are on today, but they're not speakers. they are cream-colored open toes finbacks. we want to know what would become of the pink sneakers. i immediately put them back on and started running on the trail again with them. at some point before the completely fall apart, i will set them aside. there will be a memory i will treasure forever.

-- they will be a memory i will treasure forever. [applause] >> thank you. thank you all for coming today. i like to thank the national press club staff for helping organize today's event. finally, you can find more information about the national press club on a web site, and if you like a copy of today's spreads -- program, you can find it there as well. thank you. we are adjourned.

. . >> wrapping up here with senator wendy davis of texas. she is planning to run for one of two offices, either her current seat or for the governor of texas. she has yet to make a final decision. seabed,issed any of the it can be seen any time at the c-span video c-span.org. . and we have been getting your speech in theher

press club. stephen anthony says just run for texas governor, senator davis appeared we need to in the governor's office in austin. looking now at the white house briefing room, in just a moment press secretary jay carney is expected to take questions from reporters in the briefing room. we expect that he will address the state department's announcement yesterday the number of foreign diplomatic facilities that will remain closed saturday, august 10. foreclosures -- there are closures in several african sites. the briefing will begin in just a moment, live for you on c-

span. >> again, waiting for the start of today's white house press

briefing. a quick peek at the president's week coming up. president is in arizona for the next on his middle-class speech tour. tomorrow, the president will be in phoenix, laying out ideas for homeowners wishing to own a home. his ideas fore growing and the costs and boosting the economy. in the afternoon, the president will be in burbank, calif. to spread his message. he will be on the tonight show with date -- jay leno. to he will be speaking troops and their families at camp pendleton in california.

>> live pictures from the white house briefing room. we are expecting jay carney to come out and speak with reporters and address, probably the state department to ask me yesterday that diplomatic facilities will remain closed in egypt, jordan, libya, yemen, saudi arabia, and kuwait, among other countries. it will last through this coming saturday.

the state department announced closures in madagascar, monday, and two other sites as well. they will be opening afghanistan and baghdad and kabul. the state department has issued a global travel alert, warning that al qaeda or affiliate's my target private american interests. topic to come up. press secretary jay carney will walk through that door and give us an update in just a moment.

>> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. thank you for being here. before i take your questions, want to know that on behalf of all of us in the press office

from the president on down, we want to express our condolences to the families at the loss of john paul marcum and was truly one of the greats, in my view. -- john palmer, who was truly one of the greats, in my view. he was someone who was as old school as you could get and just decent to the court. with that, i will go straight to the associated press. closure andbassy the threat surrounding that, can you be more specific about the type of chatter that led to those closures? of electronicpt communications? >> i appreciate the question, and diana steny interests. there's a great -- i understand the interest. there's a great deal of attention on this. veryke the threat seriously and have taken action because of that. i am not in a position to

discuss specific intelligence. but we believe this threat is sycophant and we are taking it seriously. actionhave taken the that the state department announced out of an abundance of caution. monitorill continue to this and take action as necessary. just tois threat americans and american interests overseas, or is there any threat to americans in the u.s.? >> i would say that the threat is emanating from and may be directed toward the arabian peninsula, but it is beyond that potentially. that is why we have taken some of the actions we have taken. we cannot be more specific than that, except to say that's -- that the embassy closures that we have announced are in reaction to that out of an abundance of caution, and the extension of those closures does

not reflect a new stream of threat information, but more a reflection of taking necessary precautions. >> you said this largely contained the area of the arabian peninsula, but beyond that. would that include americans in the u.s.? >> the threat from al qaeda and affiliated organizations to the united states and to the american people has been a reality that we have talked about for a long time now. >> is it specifically a threat -- >> i'm not going to get into specific intelligence matters. we have taken the action that we have taken out of an abundance of caution. we have issued the warnings that we have issued in order to make sure that the american people are aware of the potential that have always been with us, but which are heightened at this time. we will provide you with more

, mindfulon as we can of the need to maintain our security. >> the closures and these threats, does this followed the meeting with the president of yemen? is there anything that came from that meeting that contributed to this decision? meeting and ithat do not have any more detail for you from that meeting. it is the case that would cooperate on garett -- counter- terrorism with yemen, and have for some time. but this specific information have gathered,e broadly speaking, and that is what we are reacting to. the meeting between the president's centered on a variety of topics, including that counter-terrorism cooperation.

>> should americans in the u.s. be afraid? >> what i can tell you is that threat fromngoing al qaeda and its affiliates. there are individuals and organizations out there focused on doing the united states and the american people harm, as well as doing harm to our people. the statement that we have put out has made clear that our current information suggests that al qaeda and affiliated organizations continue to plan attacks in the region and beyond. our information suggests that they may focus efforts to conduct attacks between now and the end of august. the threatw is that emanates from and may be focused on occurring within the arabian peninsula. but it could potentially be

beyond that, or elsewhere. we cannot be more specific, which is why we have taken some of the actions that we have taken and made some of the statements we have made. >> what does it say more broadly about the strength of al qaeda in general? >> we have made clear, as i was saying earlier, that as the al qaeda core has been diminished through the efforts of the united states and our allies, affiliate organizations, including in particular al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, have strengthened. we have here in washington as atified aqap particularly dangerous threat for some time now. john brennan, now the cia thector, and years before counter-terrorism security advisor has spoken from this very podium about the rising

threat from aqap. and we have seen that in the foiled attempts that aqap has been involved in. this has been a focus of our national security apparatus for some time. >> the special operations division gives tips to law enforcement across the u.s. and of it to cover-up in lodge investigations could have the white house confirmed this? >> i would refer you to the justice bertran on this. beyond that, it is our understanding -- the justice department on this. beyond that, it is our understanding that the issue has been raised. in the past, the president has said that al qaeda core has

on the path to defeat. with nearly two dozen consulates been closed. -- been closed, is it fair to say that outcry that's core is -- that al qaeda's core is on the path to defeat? >> the centro organizational core of al qaeda, once headed by bin laden, there is no question that it has been greatly diminished. is that alo true affiliations have been a continued threat to our allies and to americans here at home.

and we have made clear that al qaeda has demonstrated a willingness to attempt serious attacks on the nunda states, our and thend our people threat that we need public in recent days reflects the fact that we are vigilant about the of others without credit to take action against us and our people. -- with al qaeda to take action

against us and our people. >> what does it say to the rest of the world when you close nearly two dozen embassies and consulates? some might say that is a showing of weakness on the part of the united states, that it has to shut its doors. as the state department has made clear, this is a temporary measure. it is limited to the diplomatic facilities that have specifically been identified. out of an been done abundance of caution, which i think is the right move, given the potential threat that exists. we are engaged are on the world. and it is absolutely the case that engagement creates some risk for american personnel around the world. and decisions like these are designed to reduce that risk in the face of a potential threat. but the engagement, of course,

will continue, because it is in the united states interest to be engaged around the world where the risk is higher than elsewhere. >> is there any concern that you have taken your eye off the ball when it comes to al qaeda? stressing for months that its core is on the path to defeat, , whenaqap gets stronger you have affiliate's like the or affiliatedzi people pulling off that a taxpayer? attacke g off that there? aqap butnot just off also affiliated organizations run the world. any action that we have taken in the fight against al qaeda and affiliated organizations in the last several years and over the

life of this administration demonstrates a pretty intense focus on the fight against al degraded the effort to al qaeda's >> is there any companies that we have enough information to disrupt whatever plot that is potentially going on. given you the information that we have. i do not have authority to give you any information on our intelligence. we have takenn some of the action that we have taken. we are obsolete continuing to rather information you to work with our partners and allies as we do that. to combat this threat and the overall threat posed by terrorist organizations.

>> on edward snowden you said is putting ontion some of the volatility eerie to do you have any more of that information? >> as i said the other day, this is not a positive development. while we have a wide range of interest with the russians, we are beginning to evaluate the volatility of the summit. have act we will decision to announce the coming days. >> does the president take this as a slap in the face? >> we have a range of issues to discuss with the russians. it has been true for four and a half years now that we have had had to deal with the russians and a very realistic way. there are points on which we disagree. we disagree with them very --ongly with the dishes and

on the decision they made with edward snowden. there are other points that we disagree with them on, namely syria. focused on them, both publicly and privately. when it comes to the bilateral summit in russia, we are weighing that not only against our disagreement over mr. other areas we have failed to see eye to eye. the we have fully assessed utility of a summit, we will make an announcement. >> we have not had a chance to talk to about this. there has been a lot of speculation over the weekend the attack will fall holidays these other or anniversaries. can you give us any information on those speculated possible

touch points? >> i cannot shed light on what has generated this regular threat. -- particular threat. we act on the information we have. we share the information we have with our partners and allies as we identify and try to take action against those who would do us harm. those who pose a threat to us, and who may be organizing an attempt to attack either the theed states or allies or u.s. facility. beyond that, i do not have any specific information to provide to you about this particular threat, and what it is related to. weakland -- over the weekend, the president was routinely briefed on what was going on. there have been different tactical reasons for that.

when there is announcement, there is often a change in the chatter, the operational communication that potential terrorists go through. can you tell us anything about that change over the weekend? are we minimizing, diverting, or changing anyway? >> i have no new information to provide to you. two threat streams that have related to our decision to close the embassy. followion like that to on the original decisions to close the entities on sunday, indicate that we have a new stream of information, and we do have that, we are only acting prudently on the information we had rate -- had. anys there something,

conversations between the president and other officials, where you expect your front from them -- hear back from them? is there anything to say about the direction, help for or not helpful? can say we are continuing to consult closely with hunger us, and that includes -- with congress, and that includes the two senators that concerned the national and foreign-policy. they have met not too long ago to discuss national security issues. meeting with other members of congress to talk about the developments in egypt over the days and weeks ahead. can the discussion with a

wide range of addictions -- we continue the discussions with a wide range of addictions. egyptians. they have extended their trip, the deputy secretary continues to consult closely with a range of groups of the society. along with our international friends, a team is in cairo to offer help as they reduce tensions and the polarization that we've seen there. the decisions will be egyptians to fg make, but we are there to assist.

what is missing in the upward trend of the economy that the president will address tomorrow? actuallyk that you're -- absolutely speaking the truth, that there has been a important rebounded the housing market. the data to describe the situation in the housing market on january 20, 2009 was daunting. nearlyrican people lost $27 trillion in wealth. though the decisions made by the ministration, with policies put in place, the result has been a very positive change in direction in our housing market. we are still not where we need

to be. there are certainly ample room to grow when it comes to providing more homeowners the capabilities to refinance their homes. thetabilize, and grow housing market across the car -- country. president obama will be in phoenix tomorrow to lay out his plans. following his remarks in 1:00ix, on wednesday at p.m. eastern time, he will answer questions from around the country. throughn be submitted twitter, facebook, and the other media outlets. please use the hashtag

@obamahousing. so many in this country view their financial circumstances through their homes. whether they own their own, whether it is underwater, whether they feel there is equity in their homes, and so the strengthening of the housing toket is of vital importance the strengthening of the middle class. that is why the president has housing asfolk -- on one of his cornerstones. i do not want to steal the president cost under, so i encourage you -- the president 's thunder, so i urge you to tune into that.

>> do you feel he is saying the right things? do you feel that here is an opportunity? iranianngratulate the people for making their voices heard in the arabian election -- iranian election. we hope that they will heed the will of the voters by making reflects thewill will of the voters. the president urges them to act quickly to heal the deep concerns in the community. seriously andork quickly to meet their international obligations. if it does so, it will find a willing partner in the united states. we have said consistently that we are open to discussions with chiron -- iran through bilateral talks.

the focus of those talks would be, and needs to be, on i ran's decision to forsake nuclear weapons. if it to do that, there is a opportunity for the international community to ease the burden of its isolation, and thereby to do what the new leadership in chiron has -- iran promised to do, which is to improve the lot of the iranian people. >> i want to go back to what jim was asking you about. you and other officials have said that there is a difference it'se al qaeda core, and affiliates. the president rarely made that distinction.

on the peopleus who actually attacked us on 9/11, and now al qaeda is on the run, and osama bin laden is dead. >> i think it is indisputable that the elimination of osama bin laden was a major a couple smith in the effort against al qaeda. clearesident has been that the threat from all kind of qaeda very much still looms. , our action that we take extra ordinarily capable women and men in uniform, the actions that they take in order to demonstratesfight, how serious we take the threat.

no one should be under any illusion that the threat does not still exist. we have numerous communications about what we need to do continually as a nation to elvesct our cells -- ours i the terrorists who mean us harm. the fact that we continue to do those things means that the threat is still will -- real, so we need to be vigilant. i do not think it is a fair reading of the efforts we make , to saythose terrorists it is not real. he has not made that distinctive. he has said that they are decimated. leadership, the leadership that attacked the united states on september 11,

2001, has been decimated. the al qaeda core has been diminished, is on the run. we have wrought continual oressure to bear on that c and its affiliates. we have made it clear for several years now that our intention in face of the threats , is to shift our august to the specific areas. we have been categorical about that in public. i think that represents the full picture. >> i want to follow by matt from the other side. there have been numerous drone strikes, some confirmed, stop -- some not. my question is more about than

drone strikes not working. this, you get rid of one later, two more come up? with all of the efforts that you , some of itabout has been reported behind-the- scenes, why is this not working? >> i think there is the fact of the continual threat from the most operational of the aq affiliates that we still have a broad focus on the effort to degrade those affiliates. we have worked worth yemen and other partners when we focus on that. we have worked with other international partners to degrade al qaeda and its affiliates in different parts of the region and the world. with a continue do that.

as we do that, we have to recognize that we are talking about an organization and individualsease -- who are singularly focused on doing harm to our interests and our people. we have to tailor our actions accordingly. do you think the drone strikes in yemen were a double sword? were they a recruiting tool for aq? >> i will not talk about the specific means that we take the fight to al qaeda or its area.ates in the i will only talk about the fact that we will continue to focus

on efforts on those who would attack us, and our allies here and abroad. extends beyond the kinetic action that could be taken. and work with our partners everyone in the region to ensure that we do everything we can to enhance the security of the american people. >> the worldwide travel alert. touristany american traveling overseas is potentially a target? or is this just an overabundance of caution? >> it was the judgment made by the administration that providing the alert was the right course of action. understanding that it was very general. we are taking actions when it comes to the traveling public

through tsa, and other organizations to ensure the security of the traveling public , and to enhance the security. but, as we have said early, we cannot be specific about where it is lesser, and where it is more safe. we just want to make sure that everyone is aware that there is an existing threat. r king and lindsey graham acting on behalf of the white house? been fullyhat he has briefed. they are roles as mediator in the situation, are they there with these research grants -- restrictions? like i would not say they are mediators. they are there as experts on the policy, and have been in conversation.

their efforts in egypt, and the conversations that they have had has illustrated the broad concerns that not only the administration, but that congress has paid >> -- has. they representing the administration? -- be to secretary burns is representing the ministration. all focused together on the very volatile situation in egypt. regularly with those members of congress that have a keen interest in the region. way that the

president's schedule might be in jeopardy? any change.see meeting of the 20 nations is something that has been set up for a while. the president schedule remains as it was. that includes attending the summit. u.s. is confirmed to attend? inck i do not see a change his participation. and i do not have any further announcements. i am wanting to ask about the nsa's surveillance programs. the threat that they have identified help bolster the case that the surveillance is needed? >> i will not blend those two stories, or those two issues

together. haveve a threat that we advised the public about. we have discussed with you in the media, and we are interacting with that threat. we have some issues with unauthorized disclosure of classified inspiration. -- information. we are in a debate about that. we have to protect our security, and the balance in providing security, and protecting privacy is something we are working on. we are working on what that threat represents, and how we can act against it paid we also want to ensure the protection and security of our american people here at home and abroad. i would not blend the two issues. operationally, if the aq kior

is weakened, doesn't make it easier, or harder, in terms of all cried as ability to organize a worldwide attack? that some counterterrorism experts might be able to address this with greater detail. the al qaeda core a headed by others,n laden, and took dramatic accident on several instances to inflict damage and take the lives of americans. therefore, the actions we took werest them as a nation both the right thing to do, and necessary when it came to mitigating the threat that that

core represented. they are diminished, but not defeated. there is no question that as we have said for a long time now, some of these affiliate organizations, in particular aqap come up still represents a threat. they want to inflict damage on the american people, and engage in spectacular attacks against the u.s. interest in people. -- interests and people. that is why we are responding to this current threat the way we are. the president is speaking to the american people soon, will the focus be on the middle class ,obs and civilian light -- life

or will it be more focused on these wars? >> when it comes to visiting camp pendleton, the president very much looks forward to visiting with our troops. i think you expect those remarks to be focused on the troops themselves. obviously, there are a host of issues that the president believes merit the attention of the american people, and washington when it comes to our veterans, and in particular, our disabled veterans. he'll be addressing that as well. is this part of the middle class, jobs, economic plan? >> no. a another of his corners turns pages -- cornerstones beaches. >> as the president try to get away from talking about the global war on terror as the

previous demonstration did, but qaeda and its be a globalseems to war on terror. >> setting aside the nomenclature, i think that the fact that we have the continuing threat from al qaeda, and the particular affiliations that have run up in the last decade, we respond to those threats because they represent a real security challenge for the united states and our allies. what the president has been focused on from the beginning, surehe came in, was making that we were using our resources to counter the threat against the united states. that is why he refocused our attention in the afghan region

against all cried. -- aq. that war was launched justifiably in response to the attacks on september 11. he ended the war in iraq, it as he had promised to do. we want to continue to focus, as we should, on the threat posed to the united states. obviously a well-known fact that the president believed as a candidate in 2008, and through the previous years that in our as a nation efforts, that we have lost our focus against that is a big threat. the president made sure we would focus again on al qaeda, as well as their affiliates around the

world. >> i'm a question about healthcare. a couple months until the portion is posted go into effect. >> the affordable care act is still a high priority of the president. he is engaged in discussions on a the promises he made limitation, as you would expect. the rest of the administration is i do not have new notes to give to you, but it is important. we want to make sure the implementation continues. as i have said all along, as engaged in said -- futile attempts to repeal it, the houses had the majority vote along those lines. the administration is focused on implementing a law that was

passed by congress, signed by the president, and upheld by the supreme court of the unit states. the law that is already providing benefits to millions of americans. their parentse on answers, to seniors needing prescription drugs, to anyone to get that.fit, benefits are more widely shared by the american people. ifwould be wonderful congress would focus on assisting in the implication, because everyone, no matter what state you're from, stands to benefit from the greater access to insurance that the affordable care act provides. bully, -- a limited

implemented fully, it will provide care to the american people. if someone from state y, moving x, wants to know how they can benefit from the affordable care act, i would hope they could get that information. >> think you very much. -- thank you very much. >> as the briefing comes to a close, a reminder that you can see at any time at our website, .o to www.c-span.org a busy week of travel for the president. his visit to phoenix arizona

will be another in the series of about thespeeches american economy. for updates-span and coverage of the president's remarks. just a short time ago, texas made senator wendy davis some marks at the national press club. feud withtioned your rick perry. are you thinking about wanting to succeed him as governor? >> a lot of people asking me that question lately, as you can imagine. i'm working very hard to decide what my next step would be. that in texas, people feel like we need a change from partisanfractured

leadership that we are seeing in our state government right now. >> what about a bid for another statewide office other than governor? >> i can say with absolute certainty that i will run for one of two offices. either my state and it is he -- senate, or as governor. [applause] question.e would you run as the vice president candidate with hillary clinton? [laughter] [applause] that, i wouldo have to say whether or not hillary clinton is running for president, we would have to learn. portion of the a remarks.

you can see the event in its entirety on our website, once again www.c-span.org. live, later today, we will bring democratic jersey candidate debate. our coverage, comfort -- atrtesy of c-span will start 7:30 p.m. >> we have never known what to do with our first ladies, and that is ridiculous through -- particularly true in the stage. we cannot imagine our first ladies without a cause, and we know them through their causes. tohave nothing else attribute to them, any official

capacity. these womenach of tells used that line, a lot about the institution, and that society that they represented here. another installment in our first ladies series. starting tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. join the conversation with historian and author richard brady.- patricia >> i've been pushing for this, that we would move cybersecurity legislation. we need to get this done. as hard as it is for me to say that the house has done something right, i am teasing,

they are fine. they have actually passed some of this, and i think we ought to look at what they have done. if we want to take a stab at doing our own thing in the -- it isut we need to good, but we need to get moving on this. all of my colleagues on the intelligence committee are worried about cybersecurity. we need to get it to get out this year. >> technology and internet issues on capitol hill. tonight on the communicators at eight :00 eastern on c-span two. >> governors gathered in milwaukee for the national governors association meeting.

the coverage is about 90 minutes. >> good morning. dennis, i amame is the governor of south dakota. it is my pleasure to chair this meeting this morning. i hope everyone enjoyed their night at harley davidson as much as i did. hopefully we do not leave much paint on the asphalt. governor walker, thank you for writing that, -- arranging that, it was a great time. to announce that next sinceill be one 100 years

north dakota and south dakota became states. i wanted take this opportunity , and you usually see a logo of some kind. nice 125 inside a circle with some ribbons. north dakota has offered to take 125th.ions for their my mice made some suggestions -- wife made some suggestions. i found it at walgreens. [laughter] it is in the form of a t-shirt, but i think it could be reduced and put on nice materials. guess it saysi

south dakota, carrying north dakota since 1889. [laughter] [applause] >> this calls for direct retaliation. [laughter] going to develop a t- shirt, wait until you see hours. -- ours. [laughter] i won't be needing that. >> well, all right. i've nothing to do but call the meeting to order. [laughter] welcome all of you, and thank you for joining us for this joint session. aroundnately, governors corbitt are not able

to do it is to get -- today. the staff director of the economic development commission is here to my right. he is lead staff of the natural resources committee. if you have need for any materials, or copies, he will get it for you. before we get started, please put your phones on vibrate. i will do that myself. thank you. today we will hear from two distinguished panelists. afterwords, our governors and guests will be invited to ask questions. we have a full day, so let us get started. infrastructure, is in many ways the backbone to our nation and our states.

andaining quality of life promoting the flow of commerce. as governors we understand the connections between roads, lochs,s, locks, dams -- dams, and how they connect us. this requires a national commitment. today we review her and national policy on infrastructure, both in terms of surface waterortation, and our resources. we will also discuss further opportunities for intergovernmental partnerships to meet the infrastructure needs of our modern economy. this is by no means an easy task. society's civil d+ineer recently gave us a rating. in infrastructure

-- developments in every sector continued to lag, we could face monetary and job losses. certain issues have exacerbated this deficit. for truly, we are fighting -- finding innovative ways to address this. other states have advanced public and private hardships to -- partnerships that is why they have been dedicated to the task of preserving innovative funding.

and safeguarding tax exempt bonds. it is totally in the purview of the federal government. it was authorized by the water resource development act. they require meaningful engagement with the federal entities that drive project approval and maintenance. this unique relationship was a driving force between be natural resources committee. a guides them to the water resources act. the principles outlined the recommendations for a federal state partnership and water resources development.

a hallmark is our call for increased coordination. particularly in the states where projects are located. this has not been authorized since 2000 and -- 2007. it is my hope that congress can finish the work of passing a bill that moves forward with the project authorizations and modernizes the core relationship with governors. a national commitment to bring this into a state of good repair with not only strengthen our competitiveness but will help us meet the goals of reduced congestion and the environmental

sustainability. i would like to turn things over to governor next and for his remarks. >> thank you. thank you for your leadership this year. thank you for all of the fine work they're doing. i want to thank you for the incredible hot tablets he. it is the best beer state. the second best beer states. excuse me. we can do a lot of things here. i get my picture taken with a miller beer it is the most dangerous thing that could occur. he is taking care of me.

that does not really work though, doesn't it? anyway. the joint session was an important one. i've got the mark -- microphone. we have been busy. this'll be a great opportunity to explore the challenges that that lie ahead. we're trying to show you helpful get along. i know you feel that way. we want businesses to go back to your brother and washington, dc dc how we can argue about things as important as we're and do so in a positive vein for our country? we share the concerns for the state of our infrastructure. we agree that partnerships are exchanging important. we are ready to do that. we're doing a lot of things. in missouri we have a nation six largest highway system.

this has been identified as a key part of our strategic plan for the future. it is all connect it. the auto industry does not just use new vehicles over the road but by a rail. this is often transferred to trucks. that is why an integrated solution is essential. this cannot be fixed with a one- time investment. we reduce this by a half a billion. we have completed the largest bridge improvement plan in our history. just last week had had the opportunity to stand on the deck

of a new bridge over the mississippi river, 16 feet board to go. i could watch this go down the nations greatest river. it was an awesome view. the people that we serve know that we need to build the next great bridges and maintain the futures that all americans drive on. we're tremendously honored. we want to hear from our first guest here, congressman bill shuster. he oversees house action on all the transportation including maritime, highway, mass transit, and railroad. he represents is obeying his ninth congressional district and has searched on the committee since his first election to

congress in 2000 one. welcome. >> thank you very much. thanks for that great example that i can take back to washington as to how the parties can work together. we need a good example. i really appreciate the opportunity to be here. at every state i have been to this is my first visit to wisconsin. penn state is going to prevail this year. i look at a couple of other governors. we look forward to those engagements. it is an opportunity for me to engage with governors. as i have traveled around the country, seeing what other

states are doing the federal government should be looking to you to get the ideas that you are implementing. >> it is your example of putting those dollars into infrastructure. it is something we need to do more and more at the federal level. the federal government needs to

be assisting. the best thing is to get out of your way seek in these forward. time and time again how states can move things very quickly. the federal government makes projects cost more. when i come into a room like this and they look over the crowd, everybody here has today or yesterday affected by the transportation system.

in louisiana talking to a manufacturer of our masuda goals, he told me were the most important things was getting those things from the market. he stopped. i can pull this out. i said i'm in the transportation business. we are all in a transportation business. we have to get the serial in the milk out in the morning. she was touched by the system. it will cost more for the milk. it impacts us all. we made some good progress. i think there are some very good reforms. we are still slowly getting the information. secretary fox will be here later today.

i am encouraged. we had dinner the other night. i didn't know was several republicans. we had a great conversation. i look forward to it i did. it is always a positive thing. it sometimes you have to leave politics at the door and get things done. i'm sure you will appreciate with the signature has to say. they gave us a poor grade.

we are at a point where we have got to figure out how to do this anyway that keeps us competitive in the world. there is a federal role. working with the state and the local governments. when you look after our our history, it is lost on some folk that the articles of confederation failed for a lot of reasons. the bringing -- the breaking point was the transportation issue. they cannot navigate the potomac river and into the ohio territory. they realize if we are not able to move our goods and connect our nation we are not going to be a nation. when they went back to draw up the constitution, they talk about commerce and establishing the roads. he said something that is lost sometimes in the debate. that is government should provide three things for the will, security, maintain justice and maintain security. that is good for all of the

people. as he moved forward and as we have moved forward through this country, whether it is the transcontinental railroad or the highway system, those were all significant works that brought this country together that made this country which i believe it is the giant we had today. we had a transportation system that has physically connected this nation. we need to me forward with something. it needs to be on a bipartisan basis. there are issues that have been bipartisan. transportation is one of them. we are making sure we give you more flexibility.

it is essential. our committee has mentioned the development act. we are ready to mark it up in september and has an floor action in october. the senate has artie passed their version of it. we've learned a lot from watching the senate to go through that. we worked closely. we met with members of congress on both sides of the aisle. we have a bipartisan project that puts the number on the committee and said committee. when a number of stakeholders. i cannot distinguish between a republican and democrat because they have the same kind of complaints about not having flexibility for bringing them having more influence in the process. that is a big reason we are able to have that. there are significant reforms.

i think the state will be encouraged by what they have to say. it is about trade and jobs. certainly you are going to get job when you a rebuilding locks. those are short-term jobs. if you look at the trade in the next few years it will double and then double again. these are good jobs for

americans. they cannot export their goods if it is not an efficient system. it will not be competitive. this is a jobs bill. this sets hard deadlines on the time and cost of studies. they do not pass it up the line. we have concurrent reviews. we're she mining the environmental review process. it'll be a responsible though. we are authorizing programs that have been authorized over the past 40 or 50 years. they will not continue to build this massive backlog.

we're looking at some of the smaller underserved perks. we need to make the investment they need to do. it maximizes the ability to contribute their own funds. miami has had their money in the bank to do this for about three or four years. they do not have the authorization. a this extensibility. people want to put this into the mix. it can accelerate things.

this is the first word that has no air marks. there are projects in it. this would be the first word. this'll have a new process. states states will be involved early on in this. there is a lot of positive things in the senate bill. after they passed the word there will be the corps of engineers. the congress has to authorize these projects.

this is one of the things i am adamant about. the word is on its way. this is very difficult to do. i believe there needs to be a passage to rail system. there are some that may not be a great ideas but there are places we need to focus on to get it done. i do not live long in the northeast quarter -- quarter were. the thing that makes it should be the place the focus is that we own the lines there. the other thing is you have 18% of our population living on 3%

of our land mass where it there is the ability to get them. this is something we need to take a serious look at. the most congested airspace is above the north these core door. 70% of all that are delayed or canceled occur because of interaction with the northeast corridor. bringing the private sector to her in. as we have seen, the ridership has grown. there is a significant reforms that needs to take place in the operation. we will continue to work across the aisle. it is made up of several state. especially if they are putting

their money into the system. when we have a divided government we are figuring out the solutions together. we will be working on reauthorization of map 2001 -- matt 21. how do we find it? we need to consider everything that is out there. how do we get these dollars in net to be able to make the investments that we need? >> we are looking at that. i know the house is committed to doing tax reform. they are looking at these types of rings.

the senate is committed to doing tax reform. we are encouraging our brother and over there to move on a lot of these tax reform's. i know aviation oversight is important to many of your states. i think they are finally right size. as he me forward we need figure out a policy to encourage the airline industry to continue to work i make these investments. they do not take money. jive that back in without

government support. finally, i come to you today to ask for your help. certainly i cannot do it alone. i traveled here not only learn from what you do but to help us engage your constituencies to the importance of this. i think almost everyone one of you mentioned infrastructure. it is the act phone of the economy. we are needing you to help explain to them the importance of moving a transportation bill. it is good for the business.

it is to advocate for the transportation bill. working with groups like that, there is another one that has been formed in washington. mary peters who is here at us today has an very much an advocate of america's infrastructure alliance that has an funded by the airlines, water transportation, put this together to form the alliance to advocate and put the american people. you do not understand the importance of the waterway system. making sure the american people understand that is important. it is a big effort. we're all going to need to pitch in and make sure we are involved in this for.

we have an absolutely critical role in moving this agenda forward. congress needs to hear from you. i believe we can have success. i believe we will be able to do what is necessary to keep this country in a competitive state. if you have places like brazil they want to drive down the cost. these are the kind that competitive situations that are occurring out there. they have signed a deal that they will not go through the panama canal. the world is getting smaller.to.

i think this is a vital area. i appreciate the opportunity. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you very much. let's open up to questions. >> thank you very much for joining us. i to officially welcome you to the home of the last three years champions. i am sure we will have fun with that as well. i do not even mention the 45th super bowl. we appreciate your being here. we appreciate your commitment.

this is a great and rotation advocate. he has a harley in washington. it all revolves around harley one way or another. first off, he mentioned the inks on highway 31 to enter state. we understand transportation is not just about transportation. in our state we think about transportation. we think about agriculture. we think about manufacturing. we think about all of the core industries. even the things about beer, oftentimes it is not just about competing among brands.

it is about competing to see which grew grew reaching get a cold beer on the arbor. the zoo interchange is just on the way. we also have a great area. we have a transit center. we have the airport which is one of the fastest-growing airports in the past decade. these are all vital links to our data. i appreciate the focus. these are one of the few areas where you do that.

>> this is really outstanding. >> thank you. i would like to properly introduce a governor she was a former chairman of the national governors association. it is from north dakota. ed, please stand. thank you. it's good to see you. >> i guess less is saved apologies.

i just want to thank you for being here. just one question about how this will progress. there are times when politics entered into the debate. it has been delayed. in a state like ours were we have had several natural disasters in the last few years, we are in tremendous need of getting some flood protection objects moving forward. we desperately need a couple of projects to be authorized.

i hope we can get through the political challenges. one little problem for us with the bill is there are a couple of situations where we do need a reconnaissance study and to look at the entire roberval a chain. nice to be analyzed by the court of engineers. the answer to us that there is no such thing as a new project. i understand one easy way of

holding down spending as to never authorize anything new. it is not really progressive when it comes to managing the nation's infrastructure. i hope that somehow, someway there can be such a thing as a new feasibility study occasionally for a new project. >> i am cautiously optimistic. they have moved this along the way. we watched the bill go through. ifo confident we will be able to move this into confidence. there is a great thirst and hunger to get this bill. part of what i want to do is to start on the next bill.

we should be going through and looking what this brings us and through a process. it should be every year if we have to be. i know there are studies out there that need to be done, especially after you have a natural disaster with the flooding. our goal is to not only get this out but to get this on the next word of though. >> thank you. thank you for being with us. it is good to see you again. i think most of us recognize how important the interstate freeway system has been. we came together as a country and connected ourselves for better accessibility. it helps our economy. it has been a godsend.

they use federal dollars to do that. they made the, unnecessary regulations. is attached to the utilization of the money. they can build better roads for less money. they suggested they could do this for 20% or 25% less money. we understand the need for a count ability and oversight. are we over regulating to point that it has cost us money. >> i've talked to every smart person i can in the united

states and around the world to get a number to put on that. it seems to me just on interest alone it would be 8% or 10%. they were a mile apart. we are using state and local money only. it is completed when we were there. the other bridge was identical. it is going to cost between 1.21 $.3 million. they are still going through this.

they are chine to get the federal agencies to get this. it can be problematic. you're absolutely right. it was enlightening to me. this putting a lot of resources into the structure. let us help you understand some of the challenges we face. they have a hearing and say give us your suggestion.

>> we had hearings and roundtable discussions. we could get there and put into it. they are more formal. this has been very helpful to us. >> thank you. >> my former colleague. >> we appreciate you coming to join uin to mention.

a couple of things i see on the backside. there are rules and regulations. there are the projects. it is getting a bill. this is the time it takes to get those studies done. they do not have the money to do this on some major projects for economic development. there have been studies that have been done around the lake.

they go into this new one. some flexibility would occur. you can encourage them to work. they can create jobs and investments versus taking two years. it is one of the things i see on the back side of it. i appreciate this. this may have happened during the time when you have it here. a barge hit it. on that hand we were able to

work years ago to create teams and get some waivers. it has some leeway through some waivers through the federal highway administration. they get this to be done faster. anytime we can allow the states more the -- flexibility the better for all of us. as you are on break, i know you work very hard when you're on these rates.

there are these big jet negotiations. they're talking about shutting down the federal government. it creates insurgency in the states. there is a delay making decisions about creating new jobs. the insurgency that you have in washington. it is the local economies.

one of the things is the uncertainty does not allow us to plan out in our hiring practices and building practices, not knowing whether the money will be there. >> this is something i here for my constituents all the time. it is a big problem. as far as streamlining map 21, we did. we did that. they are trying to streamline this. they are constantly dredging those rivers. they had to do a three-year study. they have quadrupled over the last couple of years.

it has to be maddening to you when you see your precious tax dollars in squandered on endless studies. you have representatives. feel free to contact us. >> we're going to have to move along. we've got to move along. we have another guest speaker we need to give respect to. we appreciate your presence. [applause]

>> i have too many things i need you to help me with. >> good morning. our second speaker will be the honorable anthony foxx, secretary of the department of transportation. he was sworn in july 2, 2013. he served as the mayor of charlotte from 2009 to 2013. he served two thomas on the

charlotte city council. this is a lively, bipartisan strong group. i cannot want to take more time in to your introduction. secretary foxx, i want to thank you for honoring us with your presence. >> thank you, governor. i want to thank the national governors' association, the chairs in particular. i also want to pay respects to the home state governor, governor walker. thank you for hosting this wonderful group. i also want to thank governor governor daugaard -- governor -- governor daugaard for posting this event. -- hosting this event. you know that transportation is more than the asphalt we pay for the train to rebuild.

transportation is a bridge to the opportunity. it is the highway-insurance -- it is a highway that insures that a mom gets our kids home safely. it is the freight or the cargo ship that exports american goods around the world. transportation moves america forward. when we build bridges, highways, transit systems, airports, and ports, we are putting our people to work in helping businesses expand. most importantly, we are giving the next generation the tools to compete. take a look of the golden gate bridge or the hoover dam or the transcontinental railroads. these are stumbles of america's grit and innovation. those things were not built by

us. they were built by previous generations and have been because we -- bequeathed to us. what will we bequeath to another generation? the generations before us believe in a better future for the next generation. while finding is tight, i believe we can still build a great things as a country. we can also answer president obama's call to give the middle class a better bargain. we can ensure that the rungs on the the -- ladder of opportunity are not so far apart. this is the challenge of our regeneration and we must work together across political lines, across state, federal, local lines to address it.

as secretary of transportation, my priority is to make our transportation system the safest and most efficient in the world. we will continue to work hard so that americans feel safe when they get into a car, get on a bus, board a plane or get on a bicycle. we will be working with our partners to get more from what we have so that taxpayers can trust us to make smart investments. efficiency enough is not going to get us to prosperity. over the long term, we have got to be more creative. we have got to work together. as you know, we have a lot of options in our toolbox and even more options we need to put on the table. we have seen how public-private partnerships can kickstart important projects, such as the

historic millwork district in minnesota. there has been $48 billion in infrastructure investment across america in places like illinois, california, and texas the we have seen our financing loan program helped denver, colorado finance their railroads station. those projects would not have been possible without leadership that the state and local level. frankly, governors can make it happen. you are the x-factor. you are the difference between a tahrir rating road and a 21st century highway that is -- deteriorating road and a 21st century highway that is safe and efficient.

i can tell you after meeting with members of congress on both sides of the aisle, they agree. the hard part is agreeing on a way to fund these needs. as a country, i know we can do it. map 21 was a good start. it provided states with 8 years of funding. it also -- states with 2 years of funding. it gave people a better value for their mining -- money by institutionalizing best practices and allowing them to work faster and smarter. map 21 expires next september. we are facing long-term deficits. the way we have been doing business is not sustainable. i do not have to tell you.

many are already looking at innovative ways to find your own transportation needs. this year, half of all state legislatures have considered or approved measures dealing with transportation funding. 14 states have discussed raising their fuel taxes. several have moved to protect transportation funding from fundingraided -- from being raided for general expenses. citizens have come together to figure out common-sense ways to address our transportation needs. governor o'malley in the state of maryland. they found they were driving on roads that were congested and deteriorated and its cost maryland residents $6.20 billion a year. his state has the longest average daily commute in america and his constituents could not afford more time spent in traffic. thanks to his leadership, maryland will be able to a --

invest $4 billion in infrastructure over the next six years. in all of these states, we are not looking at infrastructure and through a partisan lands. they are looking at crowded buses, congested highways and train stations. they are looking at potholes and bridges that are so old they could qualify for medicare. they are hearing from businesses that need 21st century infrastructure to grow. when it comes to transportation, everything we do has a local

impact and requires local cooperation. i know that from experience. i worked with republicans and democrats as a mayor to address these challenges facing our cities. time after time, we put aside our differences to do what was right for our constituents. i know that you do the same in your states. today, i am reaching out to you. i want to hear your ideas and know how you would prioritize projects in your states. how you organize transportation needs. the american people are counting on all was to lead and make critical investments to move this country forward. i believe we can start by answering president obama'scaedr the middle-class. his proposal would invest $50 billion in our nation's infrastructure with $40 billion target for the areas of greatest need.

we would also leverage private sector investments to help communities take on infrastructure for the 21st century. that is what we need to build a strong america. as we work to make the president's vision a reality, i hope what we do will serve as an example of how our congress can come together to help our nation's infrastructure. let's come together. less and less in the future. let's build transportation that works and is second to none. i am happy to answer your questions. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, mr. secretary. let's open it up for questions. governor? >> thank you for comment, mr. secretary.

at local level and the state level in illinois, we have invested $14 billion for transportation. artful way is $12 billion. -- our tollway is $12 billion. we are also doing high-speed rail from chicago to st. louis. we are grateful to you in the president for your commitment to transportation. just recently, we are just about finished with a bridge from east st. louis to st. louis called the stan musial memorial bridge. we would like you to come and you can see all of america from that bridge. it was done with a 26% minority work force. we worked with the federal government and it is a good symbol of what you just said. we have to make sure america knows that when we invest in

infrastructure and bridges, we are putting people to work in helping our businesses expand. >> i will try to make it. it sounds like a good thing to do. i was in st. louis yesterday. to your point, i was there to break ground on a project. it is of incredible importance to st. louis. they are capping a freeway that sits in the downtown area and the st. louis arch. we put $20 million into getting that done. there will be a $380 million public and private investment to get the work done. what it points out is what you just said. when we make the investment, it does have a return on investment and it improves communities. it improves mobility and it makes people safer. i look forward to being there.

>> i would note that the project would allow you to what all the way to the train station to the stadium to watch the cardinals play. it is an unbelievably transform into a project that would not have been possible. those of you who have been to the arch, we have literally dropped the highway and build a park over the top of it. it is going to be dramatic. we are coming up on the 50th anniversary of the arch. the cooperation between the park service and the state of illinois and everybody is incredible, the amount of private dollars that have been leveraged to a small amount of federal and state dollars. thank you very much.

>> governor walter? >> i have a question. the governor is not with us right now. he will be with us to launch a different discussion. governor quinn and i just had a groundbreaking for a similar issue, the river crossing. not only crossing state lines, but across the st. clair river. this is a 30-year process, getting the approval to do that bridge, which is 60 years past its expectancy. -- 50 beyond its expectancy. we will let you know about the ribbon cutting for that. you talked about economic impact. a question for you that you do not have to answer now. in addition to hosting all of these wonderful governors, i was at to be experimental and aviation association. it started in 1953 in the wisconsin. it is about 500,000 visitors for one week in wisconsin. it becomes the busiest air traffic control center in the world. it has about $110 million in impact in that region.

the challenges with air traffic control components, they picked up most of the costs, about $500,000 of that. there is an economic impact. since you are here, i would ask if you would take a look at that. for them, it is a major impact. there are eaa chapters all across america. it is an incredibly important component. it has a huge economic impact. >> thank you very much.

>> hello to you, mr. secretary. >> aloha. i just had an opportunity to say hello to my friends, bill shuster -- my friend, bill shuster. you are a friend of ray lahood. i bring that up to say that the governor and myself and people like bill and ray have distinct philosophical orientations as members of congress. i think i can say without reservation that we are pretty mission-oriented, particularly the transportation committee. we may have arrived -- we may have had different reasons and different motivations for voting the way we did. we move in the end to get the vote done on the basis of the we move in the end to get the vote done on the basis of the project in the proposals that were in front of us. i put that forward because i

would like to know from you, in the wake of chairman rogers indicating his skepticism -- probably the wrong word -- that the spending goals, while they may have had their difficulties and challenges getting past in terms of authorization, there has been a lot of fighting over the numbers -- there has not been a lot of fighting over the numbers once they are agreed to. there were numbers within that sequestration figure that had been agreed to. i understand what has taken place is that even though there was an agreement, hands were shaking, deals were made. i do not say that in a pejorative sense. some of the members in the congress wants to cut it further

even though there has already been an agreement. my question to you is, are you aware of what this is? i assume other governors here are doing what we are doing. i have the sequestration task force. nonpartisan. i have business, labor, nonprofit, construction companies in it. paving companies, everything in it. i was working under the assumption that sequestration was sequestration and we would not weep bitter teras about it. if they are going to 0-- -- tears about it. if they are going to change the numbers, it is really going to mess us up. you have any idea that if the sequestration numbers change, what are they going to change.

i am trying to put my budget together. i am not want to argue or throw darts or rocks at anybody. i just want to know what the numbers are. >> thank you for the question, governor. i will refer to be chairman, who is on the legislative branch in terms of what the internal discussions and working have been. my understanding is that on the house side, in the process of working through what had been previously agreed upon budget caps, as they started to move a bill through, they are concerned about the impact of those caps. what i have heard and read is

that they will come back in the fall and see if they can come back to the table with something on the house side. a similar exercise occurred on the senate side. the senate bill was beyond sequestration lovell's. we, -- the senate bill was beyond sequestration levels. we, at the department, felt better about the senate bill. sequestration is a blunt instrument. pham and arithmetic perspective, it places the with- -- from an arithmetic perspective, it places caps and makes it difficult for us to accomplish the goals we have for our country across a variety of fronts.

i think there is a growing sense that there is a need to re-look at it. >> you do not have any idea of what the numbers are or some of the projects. i can live with it. >> with i am saying to you is that the situation is obviously very fluid. in our department, we happen to be ready for just about anything. >> thank you, mr. secretary. we are honored to have you with us. most governors recognize how important transportation is to their success in their states.

as a former elected official, you understand that. it is economic development and the ability to expand economically. in the state of utah, we have stepped up our commitment to transportation in a significant way. we have put 500% more state money into state highways, roads, and into a augmenting the state system. we just completed 15 miles of interstate 15, expanding the lane capacity, hov lanes. we did it all without federal dollars. we are trying to put our resources where we think they need to be in the infrastructure and road building. i would like to ask you the same question i asked chairman bill shuster. i had a group of contractors i met with a few months back. they build a lot of roads in the western part of the united states. in their laments to me was the fact that they believe regulations coming to the federal -- from the federal government are burdensome and counterproductive and the -- there are too many strings attached to the federal dollars and it is inhibiting them from

building roads in the most efficient and effective way possible. they said they could build roads better for 25% less if there is regulation reform. i would like to have you respond to that issue and if that is something that is being addressed in your area of responsibility. do we have too many regulations getting in the way of effective, efficient, and cost-effective road construction? >> that is a great question. thank you for asking it. one of the first acts i have taken as transportation secretary is a notice of rule- making that pertains to truckers. right now, if a truck driver is running a route, they have to inspect the vehicle at the time

they picked the vehicle up and have to do it again when they return it. they are required to submit a piece of paper each time they do that. we have found that 95% of the time there is no problem with the vehicle. the paper work is being submitted to say there is no problem with the vehicle. we have made its proposed rule that eliminates the need to file that piece of paper. there will still be an inspection, but we do not need to be told the vehicle is ok if it is ok. we expect that rule will save the trucking industry $1.70 billion. what i want to say to you at the outset is that i am interested in ways that we can streamline and make more efficient our transportation system as long as we are not compromising safety. i am interested in your list of

any potential changes to our rules, regulations that you think will help us make the system more efficient. i have been talking to a few of your colleagues, governor malloy in connecticut, who has a big bridge project that is coming in at $280 million under budget and ahead of schedule. in transportation, time is money. if we can speed things along, i want us to do it. we have an internal initiative and map 21 allows us to look at streamlining in a big way. if you have ideas about regulation, i am interesting in partnering with you the but-i am interested in partnering with you to make things run better -- i am is interested in partnering with you to make things run better. >> secretary foxx, thank you for joining us.

i am glad you have experience working for a political subdivision. it is a good perspective for you to bring to your job. the question is on the problem of certainty of funding for states. in north dakota, we need more transportation money just like everybody else. even a bigger problem for us is the sixth month authorization, the six month funding periods clouds us a lot of problems where construction season -- cause us a lot of problems with the construction season is extremely seasonal. can you work with congress to try to create more predictability of the cash flow for at least a 12 month period? or at least some kind of base certainty with the possibility

of some enhancement later. we cannot bid projects with a federal share of less we know that money absolutely, for sure is forthcoming. the way it has been going in the last few years, we literally have to wait until the last set and -- second to be sure we have the money for a bid. the more lead time we give these contractors, the better the business that we get. it would save all of us money if we had some sense for at least a 12 month period of what is coming. >> thank you for the comment, governor.

i could not agree with you more. there is a substantial need for all of our stakeholders in the transportation industry for long-term look outs in terms of budgeting and funding availability and instability within the system. what i would also say to that is we have to see transportation in the context of what is happening globally, which is that the while i think american workers are the best workers in the world, while i think we have the best infrastructure in the world, we have a world that is quickly trying to catch up to us. we cannot afford to wait to create the 21st century infrastructure that is going to make this country continue to achieve our goals economically. i haven't strong belief that

there is a bipartisan understanding of that -- i have a strong belief that there is a bipartisan -- bipartisan understanding of that. it is so important, not only to us, but also important to our children that we figure out a way forward that helps this country compete. >> we appreciate the historic nature of your appearance here in your first significant address. we appreciate the symbolism and the reality of that relationship. also your comments in talking historically of the things we have done over the last 100 years. the primary message of funding our roads -- a method of funding our roads, from healed taxes.

i do not -- field taxes. at the beginning of your tenure as the secretary of transportation and as you look at states and you begin your tenure, what sort of longer-term advice to you have about the discussion we need to have about what the form of the income line is? we not only talk about timing, but we invented a system where cars got 10 miles a gallon and now they get 40. we have the trucking industry that is getting ready to switch to natural gas. as you sit where you are right now, what advice to you have for us about helping to lead a national discussion about how we transition the funding models into the future the same way technology is shifting the way people moving to the future.

>> it is a great question. a couple of points. we are seeing activity in the state and local governments already today. as you go through measures and sales taxes, there are fuel taxes that have been under discussion. we want to understand what the sentiment is at the local and state levels as it relates to these different alternatives. there is no question that we have a structural funding problem. the magnitude of it is not lost on me. we have also got some shorter- term fiscal issues that also need to get undressed. -- addressed. we will be looking across a range of different options.

we will be looking to congress a lot on this. you can have the greatest idea in the world. if it has no chance of making it through, it is almost moot. i think we have got a lot of work to do with capitol hill on this question. we are seeing in states and local government a lot of things that are encouraging in terms of leadership being willing to step forward, and also citizens actually getting it and supporting some of the measures put out there in the states. >> thank you, mr. secretary for being with us and speaking so clearly to the issue. i also want to thank you for coming to connecticut as your

first visit as secretary. i have been in government a long time, as a part-timer, a full time, a mayor, a governor. i have never seen an environment sustained as long as this one. although we might reasonably expect different monetary policies and interest rates will go up, they will probably go up in historical terms relatively slowly. at least before they get back to the norms. there seems to be this incredible disconnect. we talk about what people say could save money if we change rules and regulations. every governor has had that discussion. what clearly is missing -- i know the chairman mention this this lack of inflation in construction is an incredible opportunity that we have and

that we are absolutely missing taking advantage of. you referenced a $2.50 billion project that has been underway for a number of years that is well in excess of $2 million under budget and ahead of time. we can get the resources on the spot that we need to complete the project. the environment is so incredibly pro-government at the moment. the question i have -- not for you, but for my fellow governors are we doing everything we can to see common sense prevail on

the issue of transportation in this nation? i have watched democratic and republican congressman come back from trips to china and elsewhere and marvel at the state of the infrastructure in the countries they visited, marvel at how fast trains move in china, marvel at the rate in which new train stations are built. in a financial in climate where we could bring those projects online in connecticut and in all our states a reasonable cost- effective way, we are squandering our opportunity. is anything else we could do to be heard on this issue? and to be that bipartisan voice that is so seldom heard in washington on this issue? >> does anyone care to respond to that?

>> you want a response, governor? you mentioned common sense. i do not know if that is something that is always in the political arena, unfortunately. in utah, we have increased of spending by 500%. we wrapped up the opportunity. fortunately, we have been in a fiscal position to do that. we have limitations in our volume capacity. we do 85% of that.

if we have an emergency where we have to borrow money, we can do that. we use cash and carry and we also have road construction that has binding needs. we are taking advantage of what you said. --has bonding needs. from the standpoint of helping the private sector do what they do, they need to get to point a to point b. if they cannot do that, they will find somewhere else to grow their businesses. we are doing it in prudent ways, which is kind of the utah way. >> i want to add another point on this question of how we pay for infrastructure. two other points to get back to the governor's question. we have to look at the cost structure of projects themselves. the way we build projects in this country is like an old pipe. we do not often go back and reflect on how we can make that process moves faster. there are modular pieces that have allowed entire bridges to be in place over a weekend.

when you say that a day, it -- when you save a day, it saves money. we can also look at ways we can make the pipeline move faster by working with the construction industry. the other piece is the public- private partnership opportunities. you all know as well as anyone contour and that kind of partnership can be. we are seeing projects across this country that are being put together and we are seeing experimentation with infrastructure banks across the country. that is another piece of the equation.

i would only put an asterisk by the firm -- by the public- private partnership by saying this. there will be projects that will not be good candidates for public-private partnerships because they do not spin off or do not have the potential to spin off revenues. i do not want us to have irrational exuberance about them. they are a critical piece of the tool box we need going forward. if there are ways we can make them happen, we should be doing it. >> thank you for being here. we appreciate you joining us for your first meeting. you have been a former mayor so you know the challenges of infrastructure projects. one thing i want to bring to your attention is that we are a bipartisan group that has

democrat and republican governors and we actually had an gna red tape -- nga red tape committee. there were recommendations for ways that we think we can improve the nation's infrastructure, the timeliness and cost effectiveness. we have different categories from the faa to nasa to trucks come across the mexican border to the federal highway administration to endangered species, environmental issues we have to face, funding issues. we have followed the suggestions from our governors as to how we can help with the red tape to make things more efficient within the transportation system.

i would like to give this to you. i hope he will consider them. >> i would definitely consider them. >> other questions? >> we are close to of a scheduled game. i want to thank secretary foxx for making this his first public appearance, or public presentation come to the governors. thank you, sir. [applause] >> thank you. >> this is governor padilla's birthday today. happy birthday to you, governor. is there any further business? if not, the meeting is adjourned. thank you.[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013]

alexa will have more in just a moment. want to let you know that tonight, we will take you to new jersey for a dip eight among the democratic candidates for u.s. senate. they are buying for the seat that was vacated by frank who

died in june. the candidates are cory booker, rush holt, francophone, and sheila oliver. it will be the first debate with all for participating. of the primary will be august 14 and there will be a special election in october. tonight's debate is alive at 7:30 p.m. here on c-span. and the state department announced that it would be continuing the closure of a number of embassies and diplomatic facilities through saturday. they held a briefing today. she talks about the closures and here is a portion of what she had to say. not want to get ahead of this here. i will reiterate a point i made a few times. have ourrence is to embassies and consulates is open. i do not want people to think that we are leaning towards

index and closures of these facilities. we are focused on this week. that is why we made the decision to close them when many of them would be close already. everyone'st preference from the secretary on down is for our embassies and consulates to open as soon as possible so we can continue providing exactly that kind of support. house, jayhite carney also talked about those embassy closings. >> in the press, the public, and of course, our administration, we taken the threat very because of that. i am not in a position to

discuss a specific intelligence, but we believe this threat is significant and are taking it seriously. we're taking actions that the state department announced. we will continue to monitor this and take action as necessary. contains to just americans or is there any heightened threat to americans in the u.s.? >> i would safety threat is emanating from and may be directed towards the arabian peninsula, but it is beyond the that, potentially. that is why we have taken some of the actions we have taken. we cannot be more specific than that, except to say that the embassy closures we have announced are in reaction to that and the extension of those

reflect a newnot stream of threat information. >> but also beyond that, is that included in the u.s.? >> the threat to al qaeda and the american will has been a reality that we have talked about were a long time now. threat?pecific >> i'm not going to get into specific intelligence matters. i can tell you that we have taken the action we have taken out of an abundance of caution. we have issued the warnings that we have issued in order to make sure the american people are aware of the potential threat. the potential threat that has always been with us but is heightened at that time.

we will provide more information as we can, mindful to maintain our security. >> here's a look at some of of the embassies and consulates that were closed. the state department had been closed yesterday. they extended for a number of the embassies. some of what they said, they also added foreign facilities to the closure list, all of them in africa including meta-got scar and rwanda. some did reopen including in afghanistan and iraq. 's global department travel alert is still in effect through the end of the month. we never really know what to do with our first ladies. that is particularly true in more recent times.

on the one hand they are expected to have causes. arehe other hand the causes not permitted to intrude upon lawmaking. we will see how each in the way they tightrope it and it tells a lot about them and the institution. our encoree begin presentation of our original series, first ladies, influence and image looking at the public and private lives of our nation's first ladies. this week martha washington to angela can -- to angelica van buren. and during tonight's program on washington, join in the conversation with petitioner span. at facebook.com/c-span

affairs in public washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, briefings, and conferences and offering complete gavel-to- gavel coverage of the u.s. house all as a public service of private interest. this is funded by your local cable provider. you can watch this in hd. governors who met this weekend in milwaukee. this is one session where they talked about cybersecurity, what states can do to protect themselves and citizens from cyber attacks. this session was about one hour and 20 minutes.

>> good morning. welcome to the closing session of the 2000 and asked 2013 summer session. i would ask you if we could start the meeting. please join me in thanking governor walker his great hospitality. i know we all had a good time. i think it has been very productive. is conversation this morning on cybersecurity. it continues to be one of the most most significant vulnerabilities, leaving personal information, intellectual property, and critical infrastructure like in the electric grid all at risk from malware to spyware to distributed denial of services to phishing to intrusion to industrial insurance systems

are growing in number and in sophistication. as we have heard from many different security experts, unless we really improve our countries cybersecurity infrastructure, the question is not if but when. -- not if but when there will be some major devastating coordinated cyber attack. some cyber attacks have been relative nuisances while others have been massive theft. while there have been significant levels at the federal level to protect the government domains, the role of the states and the role of governors have not been explored as much.

the question is what action should we be taking to protect state-owned critical systems and how can states asked partner with the private sector, owner operators of google infrastructure, what are the components -- operators of the infrastructure, what are the components and the risk landscape? these are just a few of the questions we have to consider. we have invited matt devoe, a national security expert who specializes in cybersecurity, counterterrorism, infrastructure protection, and intelligent with risk management district. he is probably the president and ceo of fusion xl c, which is a global cybersecurity firm. he has been an adjunct professional at georgetown university since 2002. he teaches the flagship course, warfare and security. i ask you to join me in welcoming him now.

[applause] >> i'm going to bring my water because i just spent the last week at the black hat security conference in las vegas. so i'm suffering from a little bit of vegas voice here. i'm not here to talk about threats, although ice iceland on here -- although i threw this slide on here at to help you understand the activist organizations, you will obviously be missing the boat. the level of that view from the thread actors in cyberspace is grazer -- is greater than it seems on the course of the past 20 years. this is an initiative that have been working on. i was on one of the first cyber state responses at the national government level. what we see now in the private

sector, the state-sponsored attacks are no less. you should be scared at this point. i will talk about putting that threat in context and some of the themes around managing cybersecurity. although we had a picture that i just showed you with all those different types of threats, you have to put that in context with regards to what threats will be targeting you can more specifically, what threats will be targeting what resources within your organization.

so i will talk about those themes and themes of management and incident response and others. and thinking about what is your most likely attacker. if you think about it from a state perspective, is it a nationstate? is it an activist organization? and really, to manage this issue properly, we have to be beyond that and put it in a framework that we can understand and manage. the threat and impact, looking at the impact of the particular tech should also -- particular attacks also drive drive the resources. would be a cash traffic impact because it is targeting a prickle architecture -- a critical architecture? or is it an embarrassment to the organization based on data being released or sensitive information being released? we can't do this without thinking about the impact of these attacks. the third kind of critical component is thinking about for -- thinking about

vulnerabilities. the vulnerability impairment is something that needs to be managed with regards to what systems are in use, how they are used and what is the vulnerability profile. when we look at the attack to take place even with the most sophisticated the space best of the state-sponsored attacks, they don't have to bring their a game because we let them use their bnc teams. we need to do a better jobs in understanding those own abilities so we raise the bar and attackers are resource- constrained just like we are p.m. so we will increase the cost of the attacker and they can attack less good as a result, we get some inherent additional security. and make it about protecting the most important systems. one of the greatest mistakes we often see is that we will sit down with an organization and say what is important and they say everything is important.

you can't manage an environment where everything is deemed as important. you have to make a decision. you have to govern this issue just as you would govern other types of issues. so if you sit down and say, we have the detects of data or types of system, howl of the -- how many of them fall in the bull's-eye of what is critical? and have you gone through the houses of identifying what these data sets are, what the systems are and then either critical or not? customers have had in excess of 50 different types of data. when you ask the individual players, they throw most everything in the bull's-eye. then towards the end of the cycle, when we have actually gone through the process, there might be three or four systems that are in that bull's-eye. those afford the greatest level

of protection, the greatest level of monitoring. those are the systems that you're trying to protect from having a critical incident or having the data be released. at you have to go through the process to understand that. otherwise, your try to manage everything out of context. just to put it in a scene that might be a little more understandable, i chose this picture based on the security profile that we see here. because of the criticality of that position, we afford that level of protection. but -- but what if we try to do that for every member of congress or their staff? we would be resource constrained and we would be able to do it. it is the same thing in cyberspace. it is about making critical decisions and identifying those points that will be the highest threat, the highest impact are the most critical in the organization. unfortunately, the model right now and a lot of organizations as we try to do this with every single use of data and to make future to protect everything, you do not protect anything at

all. examples include critical infrastructure. we hear a lot in the press about theft of intellectual property within an organization. that is a key issue. but even more so of concern to make him a based on my years of looking at these issues is critical infrastructure. being able to degrade infrastructure and all infrastructure and now, if it is critical, depends on computer systems and network for the operation of that infrastructure. i do not know of any infrastructure. -- i will welcome one if you have in your state, that does not have a network technology or bypass in some capacity. you don't want a blended threat where they can increase the impact of a conventional attack, like terrorism, by using a cyber attack in parallel with it. so making sure that critical communications will be there and the ability to respond. citizen and personal data is obvious a big issue and a high- profile one. because it attends to test it in -- it tends to attract a lot of headlines. it impact citizens at all

levels. if you talk to them about the critical infrastructure, they may not understand that, but if you talk to them about losing their social security number, then deficit in a personal context. and then financial transactions and data, we see all of the discussion in the pass from state-sponsored attacks and stealing intellectual property, but is much activity as there is in that environment, there is also criminal activity that takes place and there are actors were making hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars engaging in cyber crime. so where you have financial transactions and financial

resources that are available, those attackers will targeting -- will be targeting the systems as well. another key point that has really emerged over the past several years or has been driven home by the recent attacks over the past three to five years, is that we have to shift away from a perimeter security mentality. we have been told for 20 years that security was about protecting the perimeter to put in a framework that we understood. to protect the persons in this room, we put yours on the outside good but the reality that come in cyberspace, perimeter security has been broken and will continue to be broken. if that puts the defense in context again of the critical data -- if i can have the curry motor-based mentality keep everybody on the outside, how do i protect the information on the

internal network? what technology should i implement? they are looking for that silver bullet. there's no cyber cyber bullets in the space as well. there are enabling technologies that support increasing technology. but there is no one technology or a grouping of technologies that will solve this problem for you. it really is about management at a higher level. but there are these things i like to call sober concepts that can guide the discussion -- that i call silver concepts that can guide the discussion. organizations don't have an accurate technology of what operating systems they are running or what their vulnerability profilers. so there is a -- for file is. so there's a lot that they can do to raise their self awareness raise their security

profile. pound for pound, especially against a lot of the attacks that we are seeing now am a spear fishing and the like, i think you get more value out of training and awareness programs than you do out of anything else. if employees make fewer mistakes, it introduces less risk into your environment. mitigation and management, not only of security in general, the mitigation of attacks as they take place, how do you respond? how do you measure your response? if you keep having attacks over and over again, how do you know you're getting better? threat intelligence and information sharing, we have gotten better at this. but the issue is that a lot of times the fact that a breach took place is treated as sensitive information and we are

not sharing. that means we are also not sharing with the attackers did. the tactics, techniques and their procedures are not being shared. we have to be better at sharing that data because it helps enable all of the inert -- all of the organizations. i worked with 70 companies and see the attacks are taking place across all 70 companies. a best practices that are being put in place to mitigate those can serve as a conduit for sharing that information. any the same types of mechanisms as well among next -- amongst your organization's and with avid sector earners and with the federal government can training and awareness, we mentioned, again, pound for pound, raising awareness of what spearfishing looks like. this was an e-mail message that i received from a colleague at georgetown, a very famous counterterrorism expert, asking me for feedback on a particular project he was looking on -- working on. the problem was that the message didn't come from him.

in the spreadsheet, if i had opened it, would have allowed an external attacker to take in the control of my computer. i didn't click on the attachment because i have a high level of awareness to be suspicious. bruce never mentioned this project to me. he usually does not interact with me over e-mail. it is usually in person or over the phone. so there were things that were interesting. when i hovered over the from and saw who the address was coming from, it was pretending to be his personal e-mail address at yahoo. but if i looked at my address book, it was one character offering his e-mail address. so they spoofed and did a good job. but there were several warning signs. you can train employees on these hangs. you can train them on how to particular confirmation and have better behavior associated with the use of technology.

establishing metrics -- i throw this up as the metrics that we use with talking to boards of directors and ceos. i know a lot of you have private sector experience to recognize if i walk into a board of directors and say that there will file it is currently negligent. working you draw the line of to establishing best practices? a large majority never get to best practices. they want to have a diligent profile. they're putting the right programs in place, the right reduction strategies in place to have shown that they are exercising due care. it's about it -- it's about protection as well. you have to deal with incidents. the ideas that we will always stop the bad guys and i any program in place for dealing with the consequences of a successful attack here in you have to have programs -- successful attack. you have to have programs to do the fact that that there will be breaches and deal with them. how efficient was your response? are you getting better at responding to attacks with fewer resources?

are they having lessen impact and are they able to recover more quickly from an attack taking place? and thinking about it in the context of early detection and triage. when you have an attack, are you triaging the systems that have been targeted? a lot of organizations from an incident response perspective, there might be 10 systems that were treated all as equal. the reality is that one over here has a life-threatening illness or has a huge impact in your organization based on the attacker being successful. you have to focus your resources on those first. and containment, preventing the

attacker from moving laterally within a network, preventing them from getting full access typical data. and then the intelligence sharing as a metric. what did i learn from this not only internally, but with pressure with others? and what can i take from others into my processes to make our response better? employee awareness metrics, getting employees to manage and report incidents. are you getting all of your incident reports from your i.t. staff because they detected on the network or are you getting employees saying, hey, my system is acting funny or i get the strange e-mail? if they are going to be attacked by spearphishing, let's get it down to 40% next time. will attackers go after them? they see it before. and best practices, what sort of leak do you have out of your environments? what's are the data is being

printed to perspective? -- are being put into perspective? the unfortunate reality is that coming responding to these these issues, we are playing lockable -- we are playing whack a mole. trying to find a program to capture this screenshot without getting my own personal computer infected with malware. is the desire to security model. you noticed that i did not put duct tape over all the holes. it is impossible to do that. but if i can do that over half of them come it makes the problem that much more manageable for me. that is a key thing we want to be doing. we want to be engaging in cyber risk management. problems need to be managed just like everything else. so we are really talking about an overall strategy for cyber management or cyber risk governance can what does that mean? you have to set up a strategy within your organization. you have to determine what your priorities are, unless you all

have unlimited resources, which adopted is the case. you have to put in the context of what is the actual threat. having that awareness of who is targeting you or your peers, getting information from the government and putting it in that true context. having mitigation and ongoing processes for how you manage the devices that are in use in the organization, that are introduced into the. position and how you manage them on an ongoing basis. these attackers are successful sending their bnc teams after us because we do a poor job -- c teams after us because we do a poor job. training and awareness and response and recovery. so when you do get breached, i guarantee you that you will get breached and you have some sort of plan that can contain and manage and reduce the impact of that incident.

and of course, the challenge is that you have to do it in the context of the resources they have available to you. that means you have to make choices and decisions. you want to make sure that you are making choices and decisions based on a framework and availability of data that puts things in the proper context. this is why they asked me to come to speak to and not just throw out slides to share ward souris -- war stories. really think about this as a problem that can be managed, they can be absolutely prevented, that you can put a management framework around and do better by the systems that are used in the state and the information that you have been entrusted with. that concludes my formal remarks. we have a couple of videos and then a q&a session. >> thank you very much. as many of you know, the nga center for us practices created the resource center on state cybersecurity. its mission is to help governors improve their cybersecurity posture by providing advice and some policy recommendations and resources that governors can adopt did interview the

dissipated in the department of homeland security classified reefing on cyber security threats at our winter nga meeting. it is just one example what the resources center does. it is cochaired by two meters. -- by two cochairs. they help provide an overview of the research center and the work underway in michigan and maryland can we have invited both governors to make a few comments. governor schneider could not join us in person, but he has videotaped some remarks. after that come i will ask governor o'malley to talk about what is going on in maryland. with that, if we could run governor schneider's via tape, that would be great. >> hi and michigan governor rick snyder. as we move into the 21st century, the convenience of online enhances our lives. at the same time, taxon are so the -- attacks on our safety continue to grow. we are committed to working

with the nga and other states to enhance the cybersecurity prost year for everyone. whether it is identity theft or those who prey on our children, these threat but sect -- these threats affect all of us. last year in michigan, we had 200 and 94 million spamware -- 294 million spamware. it's important that we are active. michigan is a leader in protecting this vulnerable ecosystem. we are reorganizing agencies and revamping site for training -- revamping cyber training programs. and through the michigan cyber range, which tests and improves capabilities, michigan is strengthening cybersecurity. in 2011, we launched with great

success are cyber initiative. today, i'm glad to announce that come in october, we will host the 2013 michigan summit to continue this important work. we are committed to cybersecurity as we strive to take your families, protect their infrastructure, and she'll are economy -- and shield our economy. thank you. >> with that, i will turn it over to governor o'malley. >> the presentation as follows. [laughter] it's been a great honor known to want to thank you for your leadership on this front and for charging the staff to move forward on this. when most of us think about that imperative and security, we find ourselves between two different eras, one pre-9/11 in one post 9/11 and one of the eight new domains that has emerged in addition to air and land and sea and space is this domain of cybersecurity.

but there is a lesson that i think all of us have learned post 9/11, post katrina and other events. waiting for help to come from washington or even clear advice in these changing times to come from washington before we act is not a security strategy and it is irresponsible. we have seen most recently, i think, in south carolina, the damage that can be done by hackers and attackers. mr. chairman, in maryland, cybersecurity is a key component of our homeland security efforts and it is also an emerging sector of our innovation economy, creating lots of jobs in public and private sector as well. our most effective tool are the talents and skills of our people. it is eric greatest defense, our greatest offense. so we are investing in better programs in our schools, our high schools, our committee colleges khmer for-your universities, ensure that

students have the experience necessary to excel. in 2010, we created the maryland cybersecurity center at college park. and we've established the pathways to cybersecurity's careers consortium. we are raising awareness and educating our state employees through mandatory training, through cybersecurity drills and creating a regimen through our emergency management agency to make sure we do this on a regular basis moving forward. we are also working with businesses to develop employer- led training in this highly skilled high demand sector. so we believe in our state that the things they get measured other things to get done. i thought the presentation was outstanding. there are so many metrics in this area that we need to bring to the floor, create, and vocabulary, common language, common dashboards we have a sense of doing what we should and must to responsibly protect our critical infrastructure